Recent publications in the press have highlighted the significant and growing number of Brazilian residents in Portugal. A report by Agência Estado, dated August 8, based on official Portuguese data, speaks of 211,000 compatriots “legally residing”, that is, in a regular situation in the country, “a historic record”. Significant increase, since in 2016 there were only 81 thousand brasucas, as we are called, residing legally in the land. Counting emigrated nationals in an irregular situation, this number, according to the Itamaraty, would exceed 300,000.
The profile of this immigration and its evolution in the last two or three decades are well known, it is enough to recall the difficult question of Brazilian dentists seeking recognition to practice their profession in the country in the early 1990s. dentists, and there have certainly been other similar cases, it is important to reiterate the predominance of a positive spirit and friendship in Portugal’s reception of Brazilians.
In the functions of consul general of Brazil in Lisbon in the years around the turn of the century, I was able to verify the same, within the reality of the time, to those who arrived irregularly. Today, the brasucas are very welcome and, except for isolated cases, the interaction is very positive.
In this sense, it is worth mentioning the action of the Community of Portuguese-Speaking Countries (CPLP), where both Portugal and Brazil have acted, together with the other member countries, in favor of the free movement of people in the community space.
Here, it would be interesting to pick out, in the broad context of the exposure of Brazilian nationals residing to Portuguese cultural, social and economic realities, aspects that could well help us in the solution of corresponding issues in our country.
Immediately, for example, Brazilians in Portugal, as in any more developed country, experience a food supply, if not richer, at least more varied than what is available “back home”. Especially in protein foods, a visit to the Portuguese supermarket will reveal such diversification of products, at variable prices, most of which are unmatched in our market.
Turkey meat, always fresh, cheaper than chicken meat, is available all year round, in cuts by parts or quarters; the same for pork, in a profusion of cuts that, for the most part, are simply ignored or unknown in Brazil: the “cachaço”, for example, a cut of one or two kilos, of part of the pork, apparently together around the neck (palette brains?), of medium tender meat, with gelatinous streaks, very rich in collagen.
Assuming the equivalence of meat quality in general, chicken comes in different classifications, “from the farm”, “from the field”, “bio” (be careful with the bio fake, in Brazil), something that has only recently appeared in the Brazilian market, and even then in a limited way and at what prices. And there are, always at low prices, other varieties of meat, rabbit, suckling pig, partridge, quail, young lamb (lamb), lamb, duck, wild boar, all products difficult, for the most part, to find among us, not to mention high prices, when available. Let’s leave, of course, cod and the wide range of seafood and fish, in an unthinkable multiplicity of qualities, species and cuts where applicable.
Cod, always much more affordable than in Brazil, where, despite being a popular taste deeply rooted in our Portuguese cultural heritage, it has become a food only for the rich.
It is inescapable to ask the reasons why our food reality cannot learn lessons from the rich and varied Portuguese panorama.
Food security is a well-studied issue in Brazil. Not all problems, however, are known or identified. In the extensive and arid plain of the map of hunger among us, and which increasingly shadows more than 30 million Brazilians, there are spaces at times deep and ignored. Among them, and as mentioned above, the small variety of protein foods available to the consumer, and even less at prices compatible with the meager family budget of the vast majority.
Beef is expensive, and the options are few and also expensive, or of questionable quality, when there is no certification. The exception may be pork, which is now of good quality and at more affordable prices, but still in low demand, partly due to cultural factors. It is worth asking whether the beef and chicken cartels will play any role in excluding or reducing the share of other protein options in the domestic market. Why, for example, is fresh turkey meat, whose price could even be lower than that of chicken, not available on the market all year round? In fact, not even during the Christmas holidays, when it is most consumed, is fresh turkey meat available. Only frozen and industrialized, with seasoning and all. And at what prices?
Beef (in Portugal it is beef), basic in the national menu, is increasingly expensive, as it tends to have prices adjusted to the international market, targeted by large producers. Fish is rare and, if of good quality, very expensive. The high contamination of rivers by mercury —not only in the Amazon —, agricultural pesticides and sewage throughout Brazil, inhibits, or should inhibit, the conscious consumption of freshwater fish.
Brazilian fish, sea and river, inexplicably, not due to misunderstandings about artisanal fishing, is still of uncertain quality and without tracking. Farmed fish, aquaculture, an expanding and globalized activity, has taken great leaps and evolved a lot in recent years in Brazil, with aquaculture parks distributed in several states, in the South, Southeast, Midwest and Northeast regions.
It covers seafood, shrimp —which is still recovering from some problems— and especially tilapia and, soon, pacu. Produced in Brazil in net cages, as in São Simão, tilapia is the object of an almost revolutionary process of growth and technological development. River and artisanal fishing, however, is unfortunately not integrated into modern production processes, lacking traceability and, therefore, quality assurance and the SIF seal that today provides quality assurance to the vast majority of food production. proteins of terrestrial origin in Brazil.
Perhaps more than any other factor, the limitation of public policies remains, or the absence of them, in favor of diversification, due to ignorance, or connivance with specific interests. We have a lot to learn from other countries, where the diversity of access to food, apart from and in addition to price policies, quality assurance, education and culture, land occupation and sustainable development, permanently integrates the government and legislative management agendas with regard to food security.
In fact, there doesn’t even seem to be a public debate specifically regarding access to food diversity.
Even because the fight against hunger cannot be justified in a model of food quality poverty, or contaminated food. There was never a famine in Paraguay, even in the most difficult times, as meat and milk were always available and in abundance. The market was just the domestic one, of course.
When we change the scenario to Sarney’s times in the Presidency of the Republic, and with the Cruz plan leaving the new currency overvalued, supermarket shelves emptied of traditional products for the domestic market, such as beef, milk or chicken. They took their place, discreetly, and sold at bargain prices, sophisticated Brazilian products destined for export.
[Eram produtos como magret de pato, perdiz e até faisão, aves criadas por exemplo em sítios no entorno de Brasília, ou os filezinhos de porco, os “solomillos”, então não disponíveis e somente em anos recentes conhecidos no mercado interno. Com o cruzado sobrevalorizado em relação ao dólar, mais compensava despejá-los no mercado interno.
De pouco adiantou. Ao que me recordo, tais produtos dormiam nas prateleiras dos setores de congelados, pelo simples motivo de que poucos consumidores conseguiam identificá-los, ou sabiam o que deles fazer. Ou seja, cuida-se mal da economia, e ignora-se sua interação com as políticas públicas em educação, saúde, cultura e meio ambiente. Fernando Henrique Cardoso se gabou, em 1995, de inaugurar a era do “frango a R$ 1 o quilo”. De lá para cá, vimos o valor e em boa parte a qualidade de ambos os produtos se desmancharem, também sem grandes efeitos no combate à fome.
