In a radio interview, Senator Sebastián Da Silva harshly questioned the purchase of the María Dolores ranch.
Senator Sebastián Da Silva harshly questions the purchase of the María Dolores ranch by the National Colonization Institute and demands that the government halt a multi-million-dollar operation that he considers "an ideological whim without planning."
Senator Sebastián Da Silva criticized the purchase of the María Dolores ranch, citing a lack of technical evaluation, a possible overpricing, and a political orientation linked to José Mujica's legacy. Photo by Dante Fernandez / FocoUy
During a radio interview, the white legislator criticized the lack of serious technical evaluation and denounced that the field, valued at more than 32 million dollars, will not benefit the settlers but large
In an extensive interview this Monday, Nationalist Senator Sebastián Da Silva harshly criticized the purchase of the María Dolores ranch by the National Institute of Colonization. The acquisition, valued at $32.5 million , sparked controversy due to the alleged lack of adequate technical studies and what Da Silva described as a "Tupamaro whim to honor Mujica's memory."
The legislator argued that Article 170 of the Constitution empowers the Executive Branch to oversee the expenditures of autonomous entities and urged the President of the Republic to halt the operation. "We are facing an unplanned expense. No one in the government took the time to go and inspect the field," he asserted.
Da Silva reported that the land assessment was conducted using drone images and without on-site inspection by authorities or qualified technicians. "I've been involved in irrigation system deliveries, and every pivot is a problem. You can't value an irrigation system in millions of dollars with a drone," he said.
According to the senator, the purchase of the ranch does not directly benefit rural producers: "It's an indivisible field, with an irrigation system that's difficult to manage and expensive. There's no way to distribute it among farmers without creating inequality."
He also warned that the resources could have been better used: "With 32 million euros, you can buy 10,000 hectares of productive land in other areas of the country. And there are thousands of settler families still waiting for a well or a septic tank."
Da Silva also rejected the official argument of preventing the foreign ownership of land: "The buyer was Uruguayan, a producer with a track record and financial backing. The rhetoric against foreign ownership falls flat when you look at what happened during the Mujica and Vázquez administrations."
For the white legislator, the true destiny of the countryside will not be a colony of small producers, but rather will end up under the administration of powerful unions. "They're going to transform it into a breeding farm or a dairy center for unions like the National Association of Milk Producers. And there are no poor people there," he stated.
Finally, Da Silva criticized the ruling party's silence: "No one is explaining anything. Not Minister Fratti, nor the Institute. I'm willing to fight this fight alone, if necessary, because this is a bad decision and a waste that Uruguay cannot afford."