Some lawmakers have requested details about the president’s visits to the US, Switzerland, Israel, Italy and Spain, which they say were more private than public in nature as he did not meet with government officials
Even before he landed in Spain, before he opened his mouth and triggered a spat with the Spanish government, Javier Milei’s trip was already involved in controversy back home in Argentina. Since taking office over five months ago, the president has made six trips abroad, but in most of them he did not develop a state agenda or hold meetings with national authorities; instead, he participated in activities with more ties to his own personal interests than to national ones. Opposition leaders are questioning the fact that, while the president proclaims that “there is no money” and implements severe cuts to public spending — with the chainsaw as an emblem — Milei and his entourage are using the presidential plane and spending public funds to go on what they say amounts to publicity tours around the world.
Milei’s visit to Madrid last weekend had been confirmed by the Argentine president on March 29, when he announced on his social media accounts that he would participate in a far-right political summit in Madrid hosted by Spain’s ultranationalist party Vox, whose leader Santiago Abascal was described by Milei as his “dear friend.” After the first questions began to emerge regarding the private nature of the trip, the government responded that Milei would have an official agenda and that he would be meeting with business leaders in Spain. It was a full 45 days after the trip was announced that the meeting and its participants were confirmed.
Imagine being so morally dishonest and inconsistent that you are willing to criticize Milei for things that Peronists have been doing for decades (on a larger scale and for absolutely shameful reasons). Also, the malice of selling an estimate as if it were a fact.
It seems wrong to me to look at a specific expense and imply that public funds are being wasted. Public spending cannot be zero, no matter who governs. What must be ensured is that the money that is actually spent is spent with care not to waste and that it serves a purpose that benefits the country.
In this case, it would be interesting if instead of saying “it cost the state more than half a million dollars” they said if it could have been done for less money (considering that he is a president and the mobility limitations that entails) and if the the objective of the trip can be considered in pursuit of the general interest of moving the country forward.
The way it is written lacks logical support and shows a simple attempt at a cheap, ineffective blow.
As a note of interest, the used presidential plane that the previous leftist government bought does not spend the same as a commercial one, because it is outdated, it is hyper inefficient in autonomy and performance, requires constant maintenance, is not efficient with fuel among other things (it needs to be “taken for a walk” empty constantly because if it stops it breaks more and those repairs are much more expensive than flying it “pointlessly” to prevent it from breaking). . That’s why it is more expensive (much more expensive) than a regular flight. Oh but complaining about current administration spending while turning a blind eye to the spending of the previous administration is free!
No le des de comer a los chanchos