Lira defends that the government sell shares to stop being the majority in Petrobras

The president of the Chamber, Arthur Lira (PP-AL), defended this Friday (27) that the government of Jair Bolsonaro (PL) sell in BNDES the shares it has in Petrobras to stop being the majority shareholder of the company and, thus, , avoid the wear and tear caused by the oil company’s pricing policy.

Lira gave an interview to Bandeirantes radio this Friday morning and spoke about the measures adopted by Congress to try to reduce the cost of energy and the price of fuel in the country.

The president of the Chamber, who frequently criticizes the state-owned company’s pricing policy, raised the possibility that the government could send a project to sell its stake in view of the assessment that the complete privatization of Petrobras should not take place due to the current scenario in the country.

“Can you imagine in a polarized Brazil, full of versions of how we live, you voting for a PEC [proposta de emenda à Constituição] today of privatization of Petrobras. Full privatization I think the timing is perhaps inadequate, too little,” he said.

“Now, the government can, through a bill or in a quicker discussion, sell the shares it has in the BNDES, around 14%. It would no longer be the majority. It would take the responsibility of the lack of sensitivity of the Petrobras”, he defended.

In the opinion of the president of the Chamber, Petrobras has no structuring bias for the country other than the payment of dividends to shareholders.

“And here it hides itself in the fact that the government has a majority in order not to pay for the wear and tear of its inaction, its lack of sensitivity,” he said.

“Petrobras in Brazil is an independent living being, it has no social function, it has no structuring function. Either we privatize this company or take the toughest measures. It is not taking care, as in an ESG rule [boas práticas ambientais, sociais e de governança], of your company name. Because all Petrobras wear and tear doesn’t go to Petrobras. All wear and tear goes to the federal government.”

According to him, the new minister of Mines and Energy, Adolfo Sachsida, must face up to the state-owned company.

In the interview, Lira discussed other measures to try to reduce the price of fuel and energy in the country.

The deputy said that Congress has been charging Minister Paulo Guedes (Economy) a direct subsidy for diesel oil for truck drivers, in addition to assistance for taxi drivers and app drivers. Lira said the benefit could go directly to the categories.

“Because we don’t need it here either, with all this issue of spending caps and fiscal responsibility, maybe we don’t have room to subsidize all fuels linearly for everyone.”

“But straight, for what causes inflation, which is for cargo transport in Brazil and collective transport, these taxi drivers, Uber, it’s possible.”

He criticized those who say that the president would be ineligible if he adopted measures like the ones he defends. “An action like this is not justified. [junto ao TSE pedindo a inelegibilidade]. The world is in a state of exception.”

Then, he defended the vote, this week, of the project that limits the ICMS on fuels, energy, collective transport and telecommunications.

The project is part of an offensive by Lira to try to reduce the price of energy in the country, amid concerns among Bolsonaro allies about the impact of inflation on the elections.

The text approved this Wednesday classifies fuels, natural gas, electricity, communications and public transport as essential goods and services. With this, it would be worth understanding the STF that limits the incidence of the tax on these items to a range of 17% to 18%.

The Chamber’s final proposal began to provide for compensation to states in case of loss of revenue.

Lira said that the president of the Senate, Rodrigo Pacheco (PSD-MG), as well as senators were receptive to the text. “Because I understand that it is nobody’s project, it is a structuring project that fundamentally modifies this issue of taxes on essential services.”