It was a very low-key announcement saying they will slowly phase out the gasoline subsidy and let prices rise to market. So far there has been little
public opposition, just the usual PRI accusations that it is all a grand PAN plan to force privatization of the oil industry.bajabound2005 - 8-6-2008 at 10:38 PM
and your source on this is.....Bajaboy - 8-6-2008 at 10:40 PM
Great article regarding this in last week's Economist
Zacsanluquëna - 8-7-2008 at 12:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by bajabound2005
and your source on this is.....
Al comparecer ante diputados, el secretario de Economía, Eduardo Sojo, aseguró que continuará el incremento de precio de la gasolina para emparejarla
con los precios internacionales. “En realidad tenemos en nuestro país, yo diría, la gasolina al precio más económico, seguramente, de casi todos los
países del mundo. la adecuación a los niveles que se están dando a nivel mundial, debe ser precisamente gradual”.CaboRon - 8-7-2008 at 07:45 AM
It's about time ....
let the market price prevail .....
CaboRonk-rico - 8-7-2008 at 08:14 AM
This is important news that will impact the economy and politics. I can't read Spanish so I have some questions.
Is it a done deal or is it a proposal?
Just how much per gallon is the current subsidy? Subtracting the cost per gallon in Mex from the cost in California is not the answer because of
different tax systems.
Over what period of time will the subsidy be eliminated?
Will it be totally eliminated or will it be a fixed at a certain percentage?
Economist article
bajabound - 8-7-2008 at 08:43 AM
I re-read both the print and wed articles published in the Economist and neither seemed to mention anything about a reduction in the gas subsidy in
Mexico. I could be missing something and apologize if I have or if I have the wrong article. Below is the web article from the Economist which I read.
Energy reform in Mexico
Crude and oily
Jul 24th 2008 | MEXICO CITY
From The Economist print edition
A controversial referendum and the future of the state oil company
IN HIS farewell address, George Washington gave warning of the dangers of political parties. Whenever possible, he said, each party would “make the
public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction.” Mexico’s state-run oil company, Pemex, is accustomed to
being the victim of ill-concerting, probably because it provides close to 40% of the government’s revenue. It is also in decline. Since 2005, daily
production has dropped more than 300,000 barrels per day, or some 10% of the total. Reserves have been falling since the mid-1980s.
Since the beginning of the year, Mexican politicians have been wrapped up in a debate about how to revive Pemex, which controls all aspects of
petroleum in Mexico, from offshore exploration to the pump. It is riddled with wastefulness. Mexico has to import over 40% of its petrol because of a
lack of refining capacity. It then resells it at subsidised prices to the public. Some $20 billion will be spent on the subsidy this year. It is hard
to get rid of, both because of the direct political impact that ending it would have and because of fear of provoking inflation.
All parties agree that things look bad. There is also some consensus that deepwater exploration of the type that has been so successful in Brazil is
now necessary. But there is no agreement on how to fund it, or where to get the technical expertise for deepwater drilling from. This wrangling
reveals much about Mexico’s underlying thinking about the respective roles of the state and the private sector.
The country’s constitution states that the petroleum industry is the exclusive province of the state. The centre-right government of Felipe Calderón
decided not to attempt to change this, reckoning that the secondary laws that spell out what the constitution means allow enough wiggle room for its
plan.
Mr Calderón proposed a package of reforms in April after months of behind-the-scenes negotiation with the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), a
centrist opposition party that had been his ally in previous reforms to the state pension system and the public finances. Mr Calderón wants
incentive-based contracts for deepwater exploration, to allow private industry to build refineries, and to make a series of changes to Pemex’s
corporate structure that would give it more autonomy while remaining part of the government.
The opposition dislikes even this limited involvement of the private sector. It can draw on popular antipathy towards the privatisation of banks and
telecoms, which left assets in the hands of a small number of wealthy people and did not always result in the promised vigorous competition. Besides,
argues Francisco Javier Castellón Fonseca, a senator in the opposition Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD), the oil price is so high that private
capital is hardly necessary. Despite being split by an internal struggle over the party leadership, the one thing that unites the various factions of
the PRD is opposition to the government’s plan.
Not all of the debate has been so high-minded. Much of it has been driven by political posturing, with each party trying to stake out a favourable
position for the mid-term elections to be held next year. Mr Calderón had hoped to get a reform passed quickly. This was stymied by the opposition
PRD, which seized the floor of the Chamber of Deputies and forced Mr Calderón and the PRI to subject the reform to several months of expert testimony
in the Senate.
This process came to an end on July 22nd. To keep the brakes on the changes, the opposition is now organising a series of unofficial referendums on
the government’s proposal and on privatisation. The first will be on July 27th in Mexico City and nine states, with two more rounds to follow on the
August 10th and 24th. These votes will have no legal standing but they do have the power to irritate the government. The referendum “is an action that
cannot be recognised if we live under the rule of law,” says Jordy Herrera, the under-secretary of planning in the energy ministry. “The only goal of
the referendum is to divide Mexicans.” Turnout is likely to be low, and those who do vote will almost certainly reject the government’s proposals by
an overwhelming majority.
Despite the president’s high approval ratings, Ricardo Samaniego of ITAM, a university in Mexico City, says that Mr Calderón now needs to make a
calculation as to how much he is willing to dilute his reform. In any case, the plan will not be approved wholesale when Congress reconvenes in
September. César Hernández of CIDAC, a think-tank in Mexico City, reckons the president may be ready to compromise. “I believe the government is
willing to invest political capital even in a mediocre reform,” he says.
That would at least allow the government to declare victory and move on to the 2009 elections. The outcome of Mexico’s energy reform therefore looks
like being just the sort of thing that George Washington warned against. Perhaps next time the oil company should try reforming the parties instead.k-rico - 8-7-2008 at 09:18 AM
