Repealing President Lula’s veto of the environmental licensing bill would absolutely harm the country’s interests, in the broadest possible sense. There are environmental risks, a risk to historical heritage, as well as an economic risk. Brazil may be subject to taxes by other countries, especially Europe, with which we are finalizing an agreement in December.
If the veto on the compliance and compliance license is overturned, this means that projects like Brumadinho and Mariana will not even need a prior license, because they are small. The Valongo Pier will not be preserved, the Brazilian Archaeological Society warned, because it is also of medium size, so self-declaration by the businessman is sufficient, and there will be no supervision by IPHAN. Bodies such as Ibama, ICMBio, Funai and IPHAN will only be heard if the company wants to, and this will no longer be mandatory. It’s optional. According to archaeologists, archaeological sites throughout Brazil are under threat.
- The surprise at the end of COP 30: In an exclusive interview, COP30 President Andre Correa do Lago explained that the final text refers to the Dubai Consensus, which proposes moving to the end of the excavations.
There are 63 veto powers. It would have been better for the veto to be complete, but the president chose the most dangerous points. This is what the National Conference could veto today. Even if the dispute is later brought to court, the law takes effect immediately. Meanwhile, the environment has already begun to be destroyed.
Congress initially left the matter until after the COP because it knew that doing so before would be a scandal. Now that the visitors have left, they think they can. But it affects what Brazil advocated and decided at the thirtieth session of the Conference of the Parties. At this moment, Congress is using the excuse of being upset with the government to do something barbaric like dismantling all the environmental protection legislation that has been put in place over decades, and the laws that protect historical heritage that have been built up over 90 years, according to SAB.
Brazil will face barriers to trade in its countries when partners understand that it is a country that does not have the environmental framework it has always had. The Europeans, with whom Brazil signed the Mercosur-EU agreement in December, will be the first.
Marcio Astrini, Executive Secretary of the Climate Observatory, points out five more dangerous points that could be reversed today:
First point: Licensing and Compliance (LAC), which Lula objected to, especially in the part that includes medium-sized companies. Cases such as Brumadinho and Mariana, which are classified as medium-sized companies, are included in the license. “With the return of the LAC, they can obtain a license simply by filling out an online form, and the license will be issued automatically. There are even calculations done by Ibama technicians that indicate that this form turns the license into an exception. You now have up to 90% of the processes done via the automatic form,” explains Astrini. Look at the damage they have caused and the amount of danger we must avoid.
Second point: States can decide what does and does not need a traditional license and what level of precision will be applied. This completely breaks the federal spirit of the licensing process. There is no longer a national rule. This creates a dangerous, more agile, all-first-out race. Depending on who rules, everything considered a protected area may be allowed to be demolished. “A river that crosses two or three states can have completely different requirements for the projects that affect it, one degree of rigor in one state, another in another. It becomes a carnival,” highlights Astrini.
Third point: The president vetoed the section that freed the businessman from the assumption of causation. The large entrepreneur must bear the impacts generated by his work. An example of this is Belo Monte: the plant caused a large influx of migrants, causing a wave of malaria. It required more sanitary equipment and care for the population. Today, this is partly or completely included in the enterprise account. “With the change, this is no longer possible. Everything goes to the state, which puts pressure on the public budget. Work generates influence and the state pays for it.”
Fourth point: Listening to FUNAI, IBMa, ICMBio and Iphan is no longer mandatory in the official licensing process. With change, it becomes optional. “By removing these bodies, you are clearly creating risks to indigenous lands, quilombola, historical and environmental heritage,” Astrini explains. Moreover, archaeologists have made a very strong case. If this law had been in effect in 2011, Valongo Wharf would not have been preserved. The work could have been carried out without analysis by archaeologists, historians or environmental agencies. It was precisely this work that revealed the historical heritage of inestimable value, the place where nearly a million slaves in Brazil arrived. There is a living history of the country. Without prior analysis, Valongo Pier will not be recognized or preserved. The work could have gone on without calling in an archaeologist, without calling in a historian, without any care.
Fifth point: The process begins by ignoring non-approved Indigenous lands in the licensing analysis. Today, about 32% of the country’s indigenous lands are in the demarcation stage, which are recognized areas, with an open process, but not yet approved. In the proposed model, these communities would not even need to be consulted. “These areas will be ignored in the new model. This is completely contrary to what Brazil has just assumed at the COP: in the final document, indigenous lands are recognized as key lands in the fight against climate change. They are recognized internationally, but in the Brazilian license, they will be excluded, at least in part,” he explains.
I would still add a sixth point. If the veto is overturned, it turns the self-declared rural environmental record into something immediately valid, even without verification. Today, anyone can declare that the land belongs to them. However, this registration is only valid when it is certified by the competent authority.