PT ‘always seeks’ hegemony on the left, criticizes Heloísa Helena

Replacing Glauber Braga (PSOL-RJ), who received a six-month suspension from the Chamber, federal deputy Heloísa Helena (Rede-RJ) returned to Congress last week, 18 years after the end of her last term as senator. Critical of the Lula government and the PT, she also criticized the Minister of the Environment, Marina Silva, with whom she fought for command of the Network. In an interview, Helena defended that Marina remains in the party to “recognize the victory of the winning side”; Last Thursday, the minister’s allies released a statement accusing the party’s current leadership of “attacking” and persecuting her.

You arrive at the Chamber now as a substitute for deputy Glauber Braga. Do you see a difference in how the presidency of the House dealt with him and the treatment given to opposition parliamentarians on other occasions?

All institutional responses based on the morality of convenience, which condemn the opponent and cover up their own, are despicable. Unfortunately, it is a modality used in politics, but it must be fought ruthlessly. I already experienced this 20 years ago, when I was a senator and was thrown out of the INSS building, under tear gas bombs and kicks, by authoritarian orders from the Lula government. Therefore, it is always unacceptable, coming from deputy Hugo Motta or anyone else who is provisionally in charge of an institution.

And how do you see the reaction coming from the population and from part of the left that classifies Congress as the “enemy of the people”?

Any social movement that, on the streets, condemns setbacks, authoritarianism, political persecution, will always be very important for improving Brazil’s fragile democracy.

We are on the eve of an election year and we have seen, in recent weeks, the movement of part of the right for the candidacy of Senator Flávio Bolsonaro. How do you see this articulation? Do you consider this a threat?

Their decision is predictable, because in the world of political idolatry and neo-oligarchies, they always rescue the old way, sometimes known surnames, sometimes electoral arrangements, and the government program is left only for graphic printing. They are strong, it would be ridiculous not to recognize them, but I honestly consider it very difficult for them to be victorious in a presidential campaign.

On the left, President Lula has signaled that he will seek re-election. Will you and the Network support you?

Look, we have so much work ahead of us, including building a program that points to profound structural changes for Brazil. I was kicked out of the PT in 2003, for ideological coherence, and everyone knows that. My convictions have not changed, I remain on the same side, I continue to spit on class betrayal. The country has gone through a huge trauma in recent years. We were governed by a cowardly soldier who abandoned the country at its most dramatic moment, leaving injured people behind and more than 700,000 dead in the pandemic. Before leaving power, the guy tried to stage a coup, probably to install a dictatorship. This will be the scenario that must be taken into account when debating 2026. Now, don’t count on me to reconcile with big capital, support the fiscal framework, privatize strategic sectors, drain public resources from social policies to fill the bellies of the insatiable financial capital. They won’t even count on my patience.

In the case of other dissidents with the PT, reconciliations took place with President Lula. In your case, you maintained your critical stance. What made you keep it over the last few years?

I cannot say in what context these reconciliations took place. I have an obligation to respect decisions, I have no right to contest anything or promote judgment on what I don’t know. In my case, I don’t see these issues as personal or sentimental; are ideological. The mandate I am provisionally in requires of me what I consider to be honor, coherence, courage and social commitment.

During your inauguration speech in the Chamber, you criticized, in addition to the privatization of natural resources, the extraction of rare earths, which has been considered by the government. Do you consider the endorsement given to these measures as errors in the current administration’s environmental policy?

I consider it a crime against the country to reproduce, with rare earths and strategic minerals, such as niobium, the failed history of mineral exports without processing and at a vile price. More than economic ignorance or innocence incompatible with the administration of public affairs, the lack of initiatives to reverse this situation perpetuates a condition of economic subservience, surrender and an affront to national sovereignty.

For next year, the PT formalized a federation proposal with the PSOL, which, to join President Lula’s party, would need to leave the alliance signed with Rede. As the founder of PSOL, how do you evaluate this movement and the rapprochement between the two parties?

Each party has the legitimacy to assess who it should federate with, therefore, even though it is one of the founders of PSOL, this topic must be debated in its party bodies without interference from other parties. My assessment is that the PT always seeks to be a hegemonic force on the Brazilian left, so this federation would make more sense just for them. However, I believe that good PSOL rebels do not see this possibility as an acceptable alternative. On the other hand, I consider the PSOL/Rede federation to be very important for both parties and, as we have already faced together the most complex election, municipal in a country of continental dimensions, it will be easier to move forward. Now our parties are debating this in national directories.

After the results of the dispute for command of the Network this year, Minister Marina received proposals to let the party join the PT or PSB. Do you think she should leave?

I do not believe that Minister Marina Silva, with her political group, will leave the Network, especially because, in any type of internal dispute within the parties, one can win or lose. It is part of democracy to recognize the victory of the winning side and continue working for what we believe in.