Opinion – Cecilia Machado: The culture lobby is no different from that of truck drivers

There were many positions against the presidential veto, last week, of the complementary bill 73/2021, known as the Paulo Gustavo Law, in honor of the actor who died in 2021 as a result of complications from Covid-19.

The law establishes support of R$ 3.8 billion for emergency actions aimed at the cultural sector to be adopted as a result of the economic and social effects of the pandemic. The demonstration had testimonies from the artistic class, such as actress Dira Paes, and the actor’s own mother, who was immortalized in one of the main characters played by Paulo Gustavo, the irreverent Dona Hermínia.

No tribute will be enough to compensate for the lack that the actor makes for his family, for his friends and for the huge audience that admires him (of which I am a part), but the commotion generated around the law that bears the name of Paulo Gustavo does not exempt it from the criticisms and contradictions inherent in directing public resources to the cultural sector as established by it.

By the argument of many who support this law, it is worthy to allocate resources to culture, since this was the sector most adversely affected by social distancing policies. It is true that the sector suffered from the pandemic. According to a study by Ipea, released at the end of January of this year, the cultural sector in its broadest form (including jobs in occupations or activities related to culture) lost 827 thousand jobs from the fourth quarter of 2019 to the third quarter of 2020, becoming the employ only 4.6 million workers in the most acute period of the economic crisis.

But the loss of culture was not greater than that of other sectors of the economy: in the same period of time, the number of people employed in non-cultural occupations and activities fell from 89 million to 77 million, a drop of 11 million jobs, approximately equivalent to the proportional loss of jobs in the cultural sector (12% versus 15%). Considering the resumption of activity and the most recent data used in the IPEA study, the recomposition of employment also took place in a similar way between the cultural and non-cultural sectors, and from the third quarter of 2020 to the second half of 2021, jobs in the cultural sector recovered by 8.8%, while the recovery in the non-cultural sector was 7%.

Based on the numbers, the argument that the cultural sector suffered more than other sectors with the pandemic is unfounded. Just as it is not valid to say that the cultural sector is the one that generates the greatest externalities in the post-Covid recovery, given that investments in health and education or the directing of resources towards environmental policies and investments in research and technological innovation also generate benefits for society.

But worse than the dubious need to direct resources to culture in the post-pandemic is the way in which the law was sent, violating, once again, our already weakened tax rules. The new law, as stated in the text of the veto, creates expenses that are subject to the spending cap, and its implementation depends on an equivalent reduction of other expenses, something that the political class refuses to do.

In the wake of the easing of the spending ceiling that occurred on a case-by-case basis last year due to precatories, the conditions for a new flexibilization are given.

The proposal also amends the Fiscal Responsibility Law, so that federal transfers to other entities of the Federation to face the social and economic consequences in the cultural sector resulting from public calamities or pandemics are not counted in the primary result target. From exception to exception, the Fiscal Responsibility Law is no longer the rule.

In its design, the law establishes criteria that are not in line with the new configuration of the post-pandemic entertainment industry. For example, the allocation of around half a billion reais (15% of the BRL 2.7 billion allocated to the audiovisual sector) for renovations and maintenance of movie theaters (public or private) ignores that streaming has changed the way people consume movies.

The culture lobby is no different from the truckers’ lobby for diesel bill relief, the civil servants lobby for salary increases, or the lobby of the 17 sectors that receive tax exemptions on the payroll. The Paulo Gustavo Law sets a dangerous precedent for the emptying of what little remains of fiscal discipline rules and once again prevents integrated planning and consolidated assessment of the efficient use of scarce public resources.