Santa Cruz de Tenerife approves new social aid ordinance after thirteen years without update

The regulation aims to adapt economic benefits to the current reality of the population, including the most vulnerable.

Generic image of money and documents, symbolizing economic aid and social policies.
IA

Generic image of money and documents, symbolizing economic aid and social policies.

The Santa Cruz de Tenerife City Council has approved a new ordinance for economic social care benefits, an update awaited for thirteen years that seeks to adapt to the current needs of the population.

The definitive approval of this regulation occurred in the municipal plenary session, after dismissing the allegations presented by the socialist group. This measure is crucial for regulating social assistance and modernizing economic criteria, especially for people in vulnerable situations.

"The regulation governs social assistance and updates economic criteria, contemplating complementary aid for vulnerable people. New realities and needs are considered, guaranteeing legal certainty, in addition to allowing the streamlining of the capacity to resolve Economic Social Care Benefits (PEAS) in the capital."

the Social Welfare councilor
The local government has promoted this change in model to adjust it to the demographic reality of Santa Cruz, whose population shows progressive aging. However, the socialist opposition has expressed its dissatisfaction with the new ordinance.
According to the opposition spokesperson, basic aid for water and electricity supply has not been reviewed since 2013, and municipal collaboration for rentals has not been updated for a decade. The opposition argues that the current regulation excludes people with moderate incomes, such as a mother with a child earning 1,200 euros or an individual with 900 euros per month.

"Perhaps it is not about endlessly increasing the money allocated, but rather reviewing those municipalities that do not meet minimums."

the mayor
The city's mayor defended Santa Cruz's position, stating that the capital is among the cities with the highest social contribution per inhabitant. He suggested that the debate should focus on reviewing municipalities that do not reach minimum social investment, comparing the capital's efforts with those of other localities.