The Federation's Expenditure Budget for 2022 has just been approved in the Chamber of Deputies and there are several points to appreciate from the experience that this recent budget approval exercise is leaving.
Ideally, the Legislature is the arena where a discursive exchange takes place by the legislator/legislator to try to convince others of their proposals and proposals, both within their parliamentary groups and of course the other political forces. Although they apply the force of their votes, in terms that they can exercise majorities considering the number of seats represented by each party, this also (ideally) passes through the filter of parliamentary discussion and debate, central to a democracy, where they can change or adjust positions.
This type of exercise has the opportunity to be carried out every year in the discussion and approval of the Federal Expenditure Budget Project, a power held by the Chamber of Deputies. In its development, it allows us to see, in a certain way, the health of our culture of debate and exchange of arguments to convince those who think differently.
In this regard, it is extremely worrying that in the Legislature this seems to be an extremely scarce matter. What we appreciate in the budget approval exercise that has just ended is a further alert to the functioning of the processes on which our democracy is based, where arguments and rational discussion between legislators were conspicuously absent.
There were 1,994 reservations to be analyzed by the opposition parties and none, that is, none, was worth discussing and analyzing for its possible adaptation by the ruling coalition of Morena, PVEM and PT in the budget that was finally approved. On the other hand, insults and disqualifications predominated, which, although they have always been, now there was no space for a minimum of discussion. If this gives us an indicator of the health of our capacity for communication, dialogue and conviction in a democracy, I would say that we are in an extremely critical state.
As a result, the budget reflects the priorities of the winners. In this case, these are the priorities of the Federal Executive transmitted and executed in full by its legislative majority of deputies.
As it turned out, the budget strongly points to megaprojects such as the Mayan Train, Dos Bocas and Santa Lucía and to subsidy programs for young people, older adults or Sembrando Vida.
In the approval of the budget, there is no reflection and learning by legislators and the federal Executive in these three years that have passed (the first half of their six-year term) to be applied in the second part and final stretch of the same.
The inability to carry out a debate and a public discussion that allows the opposition and citizen voices to be truly heard greatly reduces this possibility of reflection.
Recognizing where we stand is the first step in looking for alternatives. We must rebuild this capacity to listen and to respond to criticism and reflection. And in part the answer is to look beyond the figures of the president, senior officials and legislators, and recognize that there are more people who are not necessarily in that dynamic of polarization and zero-sum play.
We see this as those of us who work with different government officials, with the private sector, with other CSOs. Many civil servants have been in their posts for many years and do their job very responsibly, looking for ways to carry it out and to be able to move forward even with budgetary deficiencies. Relations with civil society have also been going on for a long time, sometimes even sharing friendship and many stories of pushing for common causes. The same with private sector actors. We shouldn't lose that. We must hold on to what we know is there, recognizing the other, reviewing our past history, without letting ourselves be carried away by this polarization that is amplified in spaces such as the Legislature, in the public discourse of political actors and in the spaces of social networks.
Comentarios (0)