Experts on the subject, IDP teachers explain the paths of PEC 32/20

One of the main agendas for the year 2021, the Administrative Reform sparks debates and raises the most varied opinions. The Executive's proposal, which is already in the Constitution and Justice Committee of the Chamber of Deputies, modifies 27 sections of the Constitution and adds 87 more. But, in fact, what does it mean to reform public administration?

“The major theme behind administrative reforms is the quality and capacity of institutions to generate well-being”, comments Humberto Falcão, professor at Fundação Dom Cabral (FDC) and IDP. For him, the levels of satisfaction with the quality of Brazilian public health, education and judicial systems are not only low, compared to OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries, they are also decreasing, despite Brazil having the 23rd highest tax collection on the planet. 

In the same sense, the legislative consultant in the Senate and IDP professor, Pedro Nery, states that “this is what administrative reform is about: subjecting services that serve the poorest to the same rules as those that serve the richest – as far as possible”.

The professor runs Economisto, IDP's Economics podcast, which, in episode 26 , discusses how administrative reform can contribute to combating social inequalities and also among public servants.

What are the next steps?

The most common path when talking about “reform” is an amendment to the Federal Constitution, which takes place through a proposed constitutional amendment (PEC). This is the case of Administrative Reform. 

To begin processing, the Presidency of the Republic sent the proposal, PEC 32/20 - which is also being called “New Public Administration” - to the Chamber of Deputies.

At this stage, the Chamber's Constitution and Justice Committee (CCJ) analyzes the admissibility of the proposal. In other words, “it analyzes not the merit of the proposal itself, but whether it complies with the Constitution”, explains Pedro Nery.

Then, “if it is admitted by the CCJ, the merits of the PEC are analyzed by a special commission, which can change the original proposal”, explains professor Humberto Falcão. This stage has a period of 40 Plenary sessions to vote on the proposal and a limit of 10 sessions to make amendments. 

Approved by the Special Committee, the PEC goes to a vote in the Plenary of the Chamber of Deputies, where it needs the favorable votes of three-fifths of the deputies (at least 308), in two rounds of voting, to proceed to the Federal Senate. Here, Humberto Falcão highlights that “there is the possibility of approving the main text of the project with highlights for a later vote”.

In the Senate, the same process takes place: CCJ and Plenary. With the approval of both houses, the text goes to promulgation. “If there is a substantial change, not just the wording, it must return to the House where it began to be processed. Changes in one House require a new assessment from the other House, successively”, details Humberto Falcão.

However, the professor draws attention to aspects of the process, which are not linear: “there is a lot of room for iterations, obstructions and various maneuvers against and for the project presented”, he states. 

Furthermore, after the approval of the constitutional amendment, several bills will be presented that deal with performance management, modernization of ways of working, institutional arrangements, adjustments to the Civil Servant Statute, career guidelines and consolidation of positions, functions and bonuses. 

And, in a third stage, there is also a Complementary Bill for the New Public Service, which will bring a new regulatory framework for careers, remuneration governance, in addition to the review of public service rights and duties. “These projects will involve very complex, non-linear procedures that are also subject to multiple iterations, obstructions and maneuvers”, highlights Humberto Falcão.

Due to this non-linearity of the process, in addition to the deadlines and the need for a large number of parliamentarians in favor, the approval of a reform of this size is a lengthy process. Pedro Nery comments: “it is no coincidence that this is the case: elites have historically managed to protect their interests by inserting them into the Constitution. Just think that Bolsa Família was never included in the Constitution, but there were rules for calculating pensions favored for civil servants or tax cuts for businesspeople in some sectors”. Our editorial team has launched a subsidiary project related to ratings and reviews. For example, go to appdeapostas.bet and download the best sports betting app.

Change history

In 2020, IPEA, the Institute for Applied Economic Research, launched the book “ State Reforms in Brazil: Trajectories, Innovations and Challenges ”, which analyzes the 25 years of Pdrae, Master Plan for the Reform of the State Apparatus, launched in 1995. According to the organizers, “ this is the last coordinated and comprehensive effort within the federal government to implement widespread administrative and institutional changes ”.

At an opportune moment, given the discussion surrounding the paths to administrative reform, the collection brings contributions from national and international researchers and discusses the trajectory of Brazilian public administration over the last 25 years.

Opinions

“Administrative reform is always important, because the state can always improve. Now, the question is timing. At this moment, the government is very concerned with fiscal issues and little concerned with issues of state quality”, says Alexandre Gomide, professor at IDP and director of State Studies and Policies, Institutions and Democracy at IPEA. 

The proposal sent to Congress mainly addresses the hiring, remuneration and dismissal of personnel. The new measures, however, only apply to those who enter public service after the amendment is approved.

For Gomide, it is necessary to defend the professionalization of the public sector: “the proposal goes against this, because it allows lateral entry, through fixed-term hiring for leadership positions. It completely breaks the logic of people entering and investing in their career to move up to the top”, he states. 

Furthermore, as the proposal also covers states and municipalities, the professor warns of the risk of clientelism and nepotism in the latter sphere, where the reality of public service is very different from the federal sphere. “If, in a small municipality, public positions are used to contemplate sponsored people, the public service will be lacking. People will not be selected based on impersonality”, he comments. 

Pedro Nery asks: “should a teacher have a hiring and dismissal regime as strict as that of a Revenue auditor? Is he really subject to the same level of pressure not to go against private interests? Or is it more interesting that in this type of career you can let go more easily, for example, a teacher who is always absent on Mondays and give the opportunity to someone else?” 

For him, the role of the State is very diverse and it makes sense to have different models to fit different jobs, just as the separation between State careers and others is interesting: “I like to think of administrative reform in this more positive way. It’s not to make firing easier, it’s to make hiring easier too”, he points out.

In recent research carried out at FDC, in partnership with professor Renata Vilhena, Humberto Falcão identified 4 personas around reactions to PEC 32: 21% are against the idea of ​​reform and the proposed reform; 29% would like to improve management without reforming; 40% are pro-reform, openly in favor of the idea of ​​reform and the proposed reform and 10% want a reform, but not the proposal. 

The professor summarizes: “there are many technical issues related to people management, institutional performance management, planning and government organization. There are also political issues, closely related to ideological principles and positions, but also related to the alignment of forces to form coalitions for and against. And there are legal issues, which are often not reasonably integrated with technical and political issues.”