Deputies debate changes to glaciers protection law to allow mining

Updated Wednesday 6 p.m. to reflect that the session was underway The Lower House is debating changes to the law that protects glaciers and their surrounding areas, aiming to allow mining in those regions. The new bill was approved by the Senate in February. The session began at 3:20 p.m. after the quorum was reached with 129 votes. In the streets surrounding Congress, several social and environmental organizations were protesting the initiative amid a heavy police presence.  Ruling party La Libertad Avanza (LLA) is the largest bloc in the Lower House with 95 deputies, followed by Peronist Unin por la Patria, which has 93. However, LLA outweighs Peronism due to its large number of allies: UCR (6), PRO (12), Innovacin Federal (9), and other small blocs. All of them signed a document requesting the session and are expected to back the bill, which would grant it approval. In addition, three Peronist deputies from Catamarca, who left Unin por la Patria in December and have backed the national government in the past, are expected to vote in favor of the bill. Due to the high number of speakers scheduled to take the floor, the vote is expected to take place late Wednesday or early Thursday.  The original glaciers law Approved in 2010, the original glaciers law established what is considered a glacier and a periglacial area which is a portion of frozen mountain land that can defrost depending on the season and bans mining and hydrocarbon activities in them, as well as any construction or industry that could affect them. It also created an inventory of glaciers and periglacial areas.  The bill, which was sent to Congress by President Javier Milei in December, proposes allowing provinces to decide the extent of these protected areas and whether they want to allow mining in them or not. According to the government, the bill aims to set clear rules about where and how mining projects can be held in such areas.  In a statement, the ruling party said the goal is to protect glaciers, strengthen existing environmental standards, and eliminate the discretional considerations that, under ideological pretexts, have hindered the countrys economic development. The bill was approved by the Senate on February 26, with 40 votes in favor, 31 against, and 1 abstention. Most of the votes in favor came from LLA, but they also had backing from several deputies from center-right Unin Cvica Radical (UCR) and even some Peronists from San Juan and Catamarca, two provinces that would benefit if mining was allowed in areas that surround glaciers due to the high presence of copper, lithium, and gold. On Tuesday, lawmakers from the constitutional affairs and natural resources commissions approved a draft version of the bill that is now being debated. Governors, vice governors, ministers, and other public officials from provinces that back the bill Catamarca, Jujuy, Mendoza, San Juan, and Salta as well as members of the national government were invited to speak at the natural resources commission. Ruling party La Libertad Avanza (LLA) leads both of those commissions, and gathered enough signatures from commission members. Controversy The proposal to change the glaciers law has been questioned by environmentalists, who say allowing mining projects will contaminate areas with water sources, given periglacial formations defrost with warm temperatures. Environmental organizations are expected to take the matter to court if the modification is approved. In recent weeks, the Lower House held open hearings allowing people to express their opinions on the provision. To participate, those interested had to fill out a form. Over 100,000 people registered. However, the Lower House authorities only allowed a fraction of them (less than 300) to participate in the hearings, which were held over two days in March. The rest were told to send a written document or submit a video. On the days the hearings were held, there was a large security operation. Several people who had received confirmation of their participation were not allowed to enter the Lower House annexe building and were unable to give their views on the bill.