Since the presidency of Fernando Collor, the topic of privatization has become a hot-button issue in Brazilian politics. In the opinion of many, the country is lagging behind the rest of the world and it is time for the state to relinquish control of companies. Others see the wave of privatization as a deterioration of public property, earned at a high cost. It is a controversial subject, even in countries which no longer have state-owned businesses.

For instance, a recent study showed that a significant part of the population of the United Kingdom supports the renationalization of important sectors of infrastructure. Other countries around the world have regretted privatizing the water and sanitation industry.

</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">As of the presidency of Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-2002), Brazil has begun to sell off its state-owned companies, such as mining company <a href="">Vale do Rio Doce</a>, telecommunications companies, airports, as well as granting the right for businesses to profit from the country’s highways. The administrations of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Dilma Rousseff toed the same line, privatizing or granting state assets to the private sector.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">For me, the issues which </span><a href=""><span style="font-weight: 400;">must be debated regarding privatizations</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;"> are why, and is it worth it?</span><span style="font-weight: 400;"><br /> </span><span style="font-weight: 400;">Generally, proponents of privatization see state-owned companies as inefficient, corrupt organizations which hand out jobs left, right, and center. Therefore, selling them off would lighten the load, create a new source of tax revenue, generate jobs and encourage economic diversification and competition. These theories are yet to be confirmed by statistics.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Initially, it seems like the magic solution, principally if the motive and results are those listed above. In truth, restricting myself to the main driving factors (listing the incidental factors would be exhausting), privatization is almost always pushed as a means to amortize public debt.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Therefore, we have a genuine motive. What remains to be seen is whether it is worthwhile.</span><span style="font-weight: 400;"><br /> </span><span style="font-weight: 400;">I don’t have a definitive answer, but I have pondered the effects of privatization over the short and long-term and shall list the pros and cons I have identified.</span></p> <h2>The Brazilian case</h2> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">In</span><a href=""><span style="font-weight: 400;"> Brazil’s case</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">, let us think about 2018. Of the budget of BRL 3.5 trillion, 8.8 percent goes on paying interest. In this case, if there were some funds going into the public treasury from privatizations, it would be possible to reduce the appropriation of debt interest and, in theory, increase resources for education, health, and others. In the short term, at least.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">This would be a positive point.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">On the other hand, if the budget dedicates roughly BRL 100 billion a year for paying interest on the public debt, what would be the long-term effect of privatizing a state-owned company to use the sale to pay this interest?</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Let us consider Banco do Brasil, which has a </span><a href=""><span style="font-weight: 400;">market value</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;"> of BRL 118 billion. Imagine the Brazilian government decides to privatize it. Consider the </span><a href=""><span style="font-weight: 400;">size of Brazil&#8217;s public debt</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;"> (almost BRL 4 trillion) and the yearly interest of BRL 100 billion.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">What would be the long-term impact of using the money from the sale of Banco do Brasil to amortize the public debt? In my opinion, it would be like using a spoonful of sugar to try and sweeten an entire ocean.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">So, then, is it prudent to surrender an asset, which has an undeniable importance in diffusing public policy, to cause no practical effect?</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">This is a big problem because by privatizing public property to amortize debt interest, the amount earned is almost instantly diluted and the long-term effect is almost null. The state would have to constantly remain in debt as the collection of funds is never enough to meet the demands.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Finally, it is obvious that the arguments of corruption and inefficiency will always be used to sell a public asset. Perhaps it would be better to improve governance and mechanisms to combat wrongdoings as opposed to simply selling the company.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Of course, the Brazilian government doesn’t need to administer airports, ports, highways, steelworks, telecoms and other things, but it cannot simply abdicate from controlling sectors which are strategic to defense and the implementation of public policy, not least because of the immense social inequality which exists in the country. </span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Certainly, there is a lot more to debate around this topic, but in analyzing what benefits privatization would actually bring, perhaps we can all reflect on its true importance.

Read the full story NOW!

OpinionNov 26, 2018

Tags: - -

BY Carlos Oliveira

Carlos Oliveira is a Ph.D. student in political science at the University of Brasilia. His primary research interests are in the field of political behavior, including public opinion, political psychology, misinformation, and ideology.