3 differences between the government project and the parliamentary proposal for a food security law

POSTED ON[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] BY [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[size=52]3 differences between the government project and the parliamentary proposal for a food security law[/size]

[size=45]Baghdad/ Firas Adnan[/size]
[size=45]Finance in the House of Representatives confirmed that there are three differences between the proposed law on emergency support for food security and development and the government project that was rejected by the Federal Supreme Court earlier, indicating that the blocs have enough time to mature the draft, but it expected that some appeals to the law after its approval could not be expected in its results. current time.[/size]
[size=45]Committee member Jamal Cougar said, "Parliament completed the first reading of the proposed emergency food security support law last Thursday."[/size]
[size=45]Cougar added, "The first difference between the proposal and the project rejected by the Federal Supreme Court is that the proposal was prepared by the Finance Committee, while the project was sent by the caretaker government."[/size]
[size=45]He pointed out that "the second difference came in the amounts, as the government project allocated at least 35 trillion dinars, while the parliamentary proposal set a higher ceiling that the amount does not exceed 25 trillion dinars."[/size]
[size=45]Cougar pointed out that "the third difference lies in the details. The government project stipulated a mechanism for disbursing the amounts in percentage and it was clear, unlike the parliamentary proposal, the percentages are still unclear."[/size]
[size=45]And he stated, "The political blocs, MPs, and the Finance Committee have a sufficient period of time for the law to mature and to produce it in a way that enables us to bypass all the observations of the deputies regarding the proposal."[/size]
[size=45]Cougar pointed out that "indications are that the new proposal has been passed in the House of Representatives because there are major supportive blocs and their numbers are sufficient to vote on it."[/size]
[size=45]He explained, “The lesson will be if the law is challenged in the Federal Supreme Court after that,” noting that “the law goes through three stages, the first of which is voting in the House of Representatives and then the approval of the President of the Republic and finally publication in the Official Gazette, and then we will wait for the outcome of the appeals that will be on the The law is before the courts.”[/size]
[size=45]Cougar stated, "The result of the expected challenges to the law before the Federal Supreme Court after its approval can be considered a premature matter."[/size]
[size=45]He stated, "The amount that was put into the proposal is not final and will fluctuate between the opinions of the deputies, but we are in front of a higher ceiling, which is 25 trillion dinars, which may be reduced below that, or even raised by the agreement of the political blocs."[/size]
[size=45]On the reason for reducing the amount compared to what was stated in the government project, Cougar replied that “the House of Representatives usually works to reduce the funds contained in projects sent by the executive authority or even that it proposes as an alternative to those projects to take into account the financial conditions in the state and prevent the spending of any unjustified amounts.” .[/size]
[size=45]He continues, "The parliament's policy in reducing public spending was used in the budget law for the past year, when the government project included 164 trillion dinars, but we would have voted on the law with an amount of 130 trillion dinars."[/size]
[size=45]And Cougar added, "Some objectors see the lack of need for the law, and they argue that the amended Federal Financial Management Law No. 6 of 2019 is sufficient to finance the requirements of the current stage."[/size]
[size=45]He added, "This opinion is correct in a certain aspect, which is that the Financial Management Law provides for the monthly financial allocation after the end of the fiscal year for the previous budget, but it is unable to provide strategic food security, which is what countries are seeking at the present time in conjunction with the crisis."[/size]
[size=45]Cougar went on to say, "The need to provide strategic food security for a period of six months to a year."[/size]
[size=45]For his part, MP Sattar Al-Atabi, another member of the committee, said that "indications are that the law will pass as soon as possible."[/size]
[size=45]Al-Atabi continued, "The committee received some observations, most of them of a technical nature, which will be studied and proposals included in order to raise the law for a second reading."[/size]
[size=45]He pointed out that "the law included a number of important points, most notably providing the food requirements for the ration card and paying farmers' dues and Iranian debts for the gas supplied to the electricity systems."[/size]
[size=45]Al-Atabi concluded, “The importance of expediting the passage of the law, especially after the current food crisis, and the tendency of countries to take measures to provide them with the appropriate strategic storage.”[/size]
[size=45]The Federal Supreme Court had ruled unconstitutional for the caretaker government to send draft laws to the House of Representatives, which led to the termination of the draft law on emergency support for food security and development, which was replaced by the Finance Committee with a proposal that is currently being discussed[/size]
[size=45][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]