I'm too tired to cite this properly or to do a good translation. I just cleaned up the worst parts and left the rest as google found it.

This is just to illustrate that the debate over private property is very active. This is a five-alarm blaze for many Ecuadoreans, since it represents a clear demarcation point in the move towards a socialist state.

Property and the Rest

By Jorge Araujo Ribadeneira

The Assembly of Montecristi held its sixth month of life entering the area of the candle (?). [I think this means, wandering in the dark] They left off forewords and dialogues to address hot topics, including ownership and the economic model. The seismesina has two more months to complete its statutory mission, initially defined as the preparation and delivery of a Magna Carta to last 100 years and improve problems in this country.

Tens and hundreds of articles are still in the queue, after a long effort of 10 officers and their dreamers. The legislative majority - or at least part of it - appears to combine enthusiastic, to end the precious verb "change". The ball is something blocking the light, but now there are more national interests in the subjects constituent of the day.

The important chapter on property was the first among the highlights. The assembly passed at first, that the seven classes of property-starting with the private-must meet "the environmental and social role" and initial claims and questions emerged. Country Alliance put a pica in Flanders [?] noting that the Constitution of 1998 also included the "social function" and is not an invention today. But a response was interesting. What now is very different. This Assembly has placed itself into something thick. Its decisions are not anything less liberal or neo as at 98. In Montecristi they are defining what will, or is going to be-socialism of the twenty-first century, announced long in the air. Moreover, orders for this next Magna Carta will be followed over the next 10 years by the current President. It is therefore necessary, and we say that at this point is clearly defined that "social function" and anything that is necessary for a future without extra concerns.

There is concern, it is true. People are attentive to the comments and also to gossip and rumours. But it is fair to note that very prominent voices in Government - Alberto Acosta, Virgilio Hernandez, Diego Borja - emphasize that the property that emerges will not be subject to confiscation, there will be respect for personal property, that the terms social function and expropriation should not be intermixed. Well, but all this must be clearly written. If doors are left open, misunderstandings may arise and this would affect, in particular, the President and his terms. The people by the house-top cling to their property. The popularity that we know now is very high. But this is a matter that in this country is not guaranteed for decades and Ecuador needs stability.

Uncertainty is a serious problem in any country and in ours. For three years, when it announced a Constituent and a socialism-with samples of very little sympathy for the private sector-there are no certainties that worth. The negative results have been taking place in the national economy, which is in sight, without figures. The Assembly must take these factors into account when facing issues such as property and the rest and combine-as pragmatically as possible-the verb "change".

***

ebear