In 2023, the flaws of Gustavo Petro’s government were laid bare. His coalition fell apart, ministerial shake-ups became the norm, and scandals defined the course of his administration. The much-touted “change” remains elusive, and today Senator Ariel Ávila (Green Alliance) – a long-time supporter of the president, who was elected with the promise of “changing politics” – admits that this government continues to engage in patronage and clientelism. However, he hastily adds that it is not at the same level as former President Iván Duque.
During an interview with EL COLOMBIANO, Senator Ariel Ávila discusses the challenges and shortcomings of Gustavo Petro’s administration. He acknowledges that despite their shared vision for change, the government has fallen short in effectively combating entrenched bureaucratic quotas and the influence of political patrons. While Ávila praises the current administration’s efforts to address these issues, he also recognizes that more needs to be done to live up to the promise of real change.
The fractures within Petro’s coalition have been particularly damaging to the government’s ability to implement meaningful reforms. The departure of key allies and infighting among coalition members have hindered policy initiatives and created a sense of instability. These internal conflicts have been further aggravated by a series of ministerial changes, which have become commonplace in Petro’s government. The constant reshuffling of key positions has raised concerns about the government’s ability to maintain continuity and effectively govern.
Scandals have also plagued Petro’s presidency, further eroding public trust in his administration. From allegations of corruption to questionable appointments, these controversies have dominated headlines and cast a shadow over Petro’s leadership. While every government may face its fair share of scandals, the frequency and gravity of these incidents during Petro’s tenure have drawn significant criticism from both political opponents and disillusioned supporters.
Despite these challenges, some supporters argue that Petro’s government has made progress on certain fronts. They point to initiatives aimed at addressing social inequality, such as increased funding for education and healthcare, as evidence of the government’s commitment to its progressive agenda. However, critics argue that these efforts have been overshadowed by the systemic issues that continue to plague the administration.
Looking ahead, the future of Petro’s government remains uncertain. The cracks within the coalition and the persistence of bureaucratic quotas and clientelism pose significant challenges to implementing the transformative change promised to the electorate. As the next election cycle approaches, Petro and his supporters will need to address these concerns and demonstrate their ability to govern effectively if they hope to regain public trust and secure a second term.
