The project of what promises to give the rite of the gap that allows, in practice, that the authors of the funds indications remain hidden.
The possibility is precisely in commission amendments, one of the main targets of criticism of the Minister of (Supreme Federal Court) ,.
The project, which is on the agenda to be voted by the National Congress on Thursday (13), is the result of the agreement with the Supreme to give more transparency to amendments. He was signed after a series of clashes with Dino, who reports actions on the subject and even criticized the “swamp” in the Union budget created by these procedures.
According to the draft to which the Sheet It had access, it allows parliamentarians to make indications through their party benches, with only the signing of the acronym leader, without identification of the original author.
The report sought the president of, (-ap) and chamber, (-PB) to hear them about the draft, but there was no response until the publication of this text.
In addition, there was another device in the initial version of the text, which created a special budget secretariat, which should advise parliamentarians on this topic. The newsroom did not make it clear how this new organ would be composed even to whom he will be subordinate.
After a strong reaction from deputies, there was a retreat and the device was withdrawn from the bill filed in the Congress System.
In practice, the Secretariat would empty the current consultancy specialized in the subject, which has this assignment and recently made critical technical opinions to the use of amendments, as the UOL showed.
According to technicians, they told the report on anonymous condition, the fear was that the members of the new secretariat were appointed by the presidency of houses or parliamentarians without technical criteria, which would reduce their independence and critical analysis.
Prior to the retreat, Deputy Danilo Forte (União Brasil-CE) said that the creation of the Special Secretariat could give disproportionate powers to the presidency of the Senate against the House, if he was under the first umbrella, and threatened to request the withdrawal of the proposal of the agenda if the device were maintained.
“I spoke to other leaders, all were caught by surprise, were shocked. Especially because the congress session will be remote and had no debate [sobre essa medida]”He said.
Dino’s initiatives on parliamentary amendments had their highlight at the end of last year, when the minister made transparency requirements for the application of resources, suspended payments and called the Federal Police to investigate possible irregularities.
The measures opened a crisis with Congress, especially with the then mayor, Arthur Lira (PP-AL).
The commission amendments were turbocharged by Lira after the STF itself overthrew the rapporteur funds, which had no transparency mechanisms.
Parliamentarians then used the resources of Congress’ thematic committees to direct money to their electoral strongholds without identifying their godparents.
Dino then required more transparency and that the indications were voted by the collegiate. He criticized the mechanism for turning commission amendments into “party leaders’ amendments,” as these were the only names that appeared in official records.
Lira maneuvered and dribbled the determination so that there was no vote and for the nominations to be signed together by the House leaders, once again hiding the original authors.
The current resolution project, which should adapt the rites of amendments to give more transparency, keeps the mechanism of nomination by the party leader alive.
At first, the proposal requires the identification, in each amendment, of the parliamentarians that make up the thematic committees.
Later, however, it allows indications to be made to the commissions through the countertops of each acronym, requiring only the signature “by party leaders”, accompanied by a form.
In the form, which contains an annex, information such as municipality and CNPJ of the favored, value, final beneficiary, amendment code and budget action code to which it represents. It is not required, therefore, that the parliamentary author of the appointment be registered in the document.
In decisions and agreements signed so far in the dispute between Dino and Congress, there was no concept of a party minutes for the indications, but the requirement that transparency was given to the author of the amendment.
“It is astonishing the effort of the National Congress to create increasingly creative mechanisms – now with party benches amendments – to prevent society and, especially, control bodies from knowing exactly who is allocating money where,” says Guilherme France, research manager and advocacy of international transparency.
Regarding the emptying of the budget technical consultancy, he recalls that the group was created in the Senate after corruption scandals in the 1990s. In the House, it has been around since the 1970s.
“Budget consulting, created 30 years ago, represented an important advance, ensuring independent and reliable information production about the budget process. Posting this at risk means weakening an important pillar of institutionality in Congress,” he added.
