The Environmental Project (PL 2.159/21) crossed the corridors of Congress, in the course between the Senate and the House, and it is up to the final appreciation. If the project passes as it came, parliamentarians will have promoted a decade of decades in the legal framework that anchors the policy for the country.
No one disputes the need to provide Brazil with adequate legislation in the area. It is an old demand from environmentalists in the face of the bamper of rules created in the taste of circumstances, which make it difficult, to say the least, make private and public enterprises compatible with the protection of environmental heritage and the well-being of the affected population.
The project intended to remedy this shortage originated in 2004, in the proposal of the then Deputy Luciano Zica (PT-MG), active member of the environmental front in Congress. The text resumed a 1988 initiative from then deputy Fabio Feldman (PSDB-SP)-who did not prosper. The 21 years during which Zica’s proposal zigzagou between the House and the Senate confirm the popular belief that everything can always get worse and much. In the current form, PL 2.159/21 compromises the effort to adapt economic activities to principles of social and environmental sustainability.
Detailed analysis of its devastating devices and impacts that tend to cause can be read in a technical note of the Climate Observatory and in the articles published on this sheet last weekend by colleagues columnists and.
This is why it is imperative to look at the political game that resulted in a setback ready to expose Brazilians to the risk of natural disasters, as well as reducing the trumps the country has to establish the world as an environmental power.
The limitations of a center-left president who holds a coalition with right parties and, as if that were not enough, have to govern with a mostly conservative legislature are obvious. To work, the agent is responsible for defining its priorities clearly; negotiate without rest; and also create efficient incentives in order to obtain, in Congress and society, support for those guidelines – the example of environmental – to the spontaneous sympathy of the forces to the right of the center.
Amazingly, none of this occurs in the environmental licensing debate. The government is quoted between the Ministries of Agriculture, Cities, Transport and Ports and Airports – which support the project – and the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change – which considers it an instrument of devastation. The plateau never revealed its preference; It does not seem willing to arbitrate the conflict; much less to explore the notorious differences between sectors of agribusiness; or thinking of incentives to facilitate the adhesion of some of them to a more effective licensing law. In the Senate, the PT and its left -wing allies let the boat run and, at the end and cable, voted against, aware of the defeat.
Back in the House, the bill can still be minimally modified; If it is revenge, the executive remains to veto it. But if it does not actually embrace the environmental cause, other defeats will come.
Gift Link: Did you like this text? Subscriber can release seven free hits from any link per day. Just click on F Blue below.
