California South wrote:Great question, NCFYM. I look forward to an answer and / or commentary from eeuu...
This allows elected officials to shirk their responsibilities. It turns us into a soviet system that is based on Regionalism.
patagoniax wrote:admin wrote:.. local goverments getting some local authority ...
The first thing that local governments in Chile do with any sort of funding or authority is engage in some heinous act of regionalism that is intended to handicap, discredit, alienate, or directly harm some other region. There are already half-baked separatist movements evolving in Aysen and Magallanes, and though they are without any real hope of getting anywhere, every year it seems that they gain some greater degree of popular support. The country would not be well served by becoming further Balkanised, through the granting of greater regional powers.
admin wrote:don't get it. this means what for Chile?
The local mayors and goverment offices have about zero real authority in Chile beyond doing silly things like selling advertising space or getting the road in front of their best friend's house paved rather than getting someone else's road paved (the decision to pave a road is made in Santiago, but which one might get decided a bit closer to home).
Point being, the local gov got sold long ago just because of the political structure of Chile. It more or less all starts and ends in Santiago, right down to the guy that gets to hold the shovel to dig the ditch for the mayor's best friend by some "consulting" firm from Santiago.
The most important factor why this has little bearing on Chile: THE LOCAL GOVERMENTS HAVE NO REAL DIRECT TAX REVENUE!!!!!
So they need to get a lot more down the road to decentralizing the country before this means anything in Chile. A lot more.