Political panorama in Peru: Miguel Torres' statements spark debate around Boluarte and Francke's management

The political landscape in Peru continues to be tumultuous, with constant tensions and debates about the government's management and decisions. In the midst of this scenario, the statements made by Miguel Torres, a congressman from Fuerza Popular, have brought a new focus on the presidency of Dina Boluarte and her administration, as well as on the figure of the Minister of Economy, Pedro Francke. In a lengthy interview, Torres expressed his opinions and criticisms regarding various aspects of the government's management. Firstly, he emphasized the importance of President Boluarte demonstrating a genuine commitment to the country's institutionalism and governance before proposing any pacts in that regard. He also highlighted the differences between the impeachment motions presented against Boluarte and those faced by former President Pedro Castillo, emphasizing the need to respect the Constitution at all times. Regarding the Rolex case, Torres expressed skepticism regarding the transparency of President Boluarte, suggesting that she has not been clear enough in her explanations and has fallen into contradictions. The possibility that the watch deliveries are related to benefits in exchange for transfers to the GORE Ayacucho was also addressed, highlighting the importance of conducting these investigations once Boluarte's term is concluded to avoid generating instability. Regarding the appointment of a presidential spokesperson, Torres considered it could be a useful tool to improve government communication, but pointed out the need for cohesion and teamwork within the Executive. He also expressed concern about the lack of clarity in the objectives of Minister of Economy, Pedro Francke, and his critical stance towards some economic measures proposed by the government. Regarding the pension system reform and the proposed consumption-based pension, Torres defended the initiative as a measure that addresses a just demand from the population, although he acknowledged that it is not the definitive solution to the pension issue in the country. In response to criticisms from Minister Arista, who dismissed the proposal, Torres regretted his statements and questioned the government's lack of concrete alternatives. Finally, regarding the government's request for powers to legislate on economic matters, Torres indicated that Fuerza Popular is evaluating the proposal and that there are differing positions within the party on the matter. He emphasized the importance of carefully analyzing each point and prioritizing the most urgent measures for the country, with the intention of making a decision before the end of the legislative session. In summary, Miguel Torres' statements highlight the tensions and challenges facing the Peruvian government amid a complex political landscape. His criticisms and opinions reflect the need for transparency, cohesion, and clarity in government decisions, as well as the importance of prioritizing measures that respond to the demands and real needs of the population.