“It was in this sense that additional clarifications were requested from the government. Unfortunately, the responses received yesterday did not allow us to fully clarify three aspects that I consider essential.”
With this sentence, the President of the Republic, in the statement with which he revealed yesterday that he had returned the decree on the privatization of TAP to the government, revealed that he had tried to address the problem properly and informally, with questions addressed to De The government, dissatisfied with the reactions, previously adopted the formal veto procedure.
Transparency times 5
In the letter sent to the Prime Minister and published on the Presidency’s website, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa, after his procedural explanation, is concerned about avoiding the accusation that this veto would hinder the company’s privatization process can delay: “These three specific but crucial questions can be clarified without too much delay, that is, without compromising the urgency of the process. That is why I am raising them on the day immediately after the government’s clarifications and well before the constitutional deadline for promulgation. .” And “knowing the time that has passed in the past and the recently announced situation of TAP’s increasing profitability during this year.”
“I understand that maximum transparency must be ensured throughout the process leading to a decision to sell control of the company.”
The wording of the President of the Republic to explain the “three essential aspects” is friendly, but essentially implies very harsh criticism of the government decree. “Transparency” – or the lack thereof, according to the head of state – is the key word. It appears five times in presidential communications.
First in the general justification of the veto: “In the case of the sale of a company that has a fundamental strategic value for the country and taking into account the history of this case, including the large amount that national taxpayers had to pay to save TAP, after the Covid-19 pandemic and the intervention of the Assembly of the Republic itself, through the Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry, I understand that maximum transparency must be ensured throughout the process that will lead to a decision to take control of the company to sell “.
To then say that “the content of the diploma – which is decisive, because it is the only law that determines subsequent administrative decisions – raised several doubts and reservations in the light of the desired maximum transparency of the process.
And then, already when analyzing the content of the decree”, to say that there is the problem “that it does not guarantee full transparency, in a phase of contacts prior to the preparation of the specifications, that is to say the rules that will guide the choice of the final buyer, which will in any case make it clear that there will be no binding negotiations and that these contacts will be recorded, which is essential to guarantee proof of full exemption from the procedures, should at a later stage the issue of the above-mentioned transparency of the process and the choice of the buyer be raised”.
And where is the state?
Marcelo also raises the issue of “the ability of the state to monitor and intervene in a strategic company like TAP”, since “allowing the sale of a percentage above 51% is not expressly is provided for or authorized in subsequent administrative decisions, and any role for the state”.
And between one reason and another, it refers to “the issuance of the diploma admitting that TAP may, even before the decision to sell, sell or acquire any type of assets, without any other minimum precision or criteria, going far beyond the intended integration of Portugal on TAP, SA.”
“The culmination of a soap opera of constant zigzagging by António Costa, who changed his mind three or four times, and a huge lack of transparency.”
The PR’s announcement was made public at 5:10 p.m. and an hour later António Costa responded with a laconic statement: “The Prime Minister takes note of the concerns of His Excellency, the President of the Republic, which will be duly taken into consideration.”
For the PSD, which spoke to Lusa through the party’s vice-president, Miguel Pinto Luz, this veto by Marcelo represents the ‘culmination point of a soap opera of constant zigzags by António Costa, who changed his mind three or four times, and a enormous lack of transparency.” The party, he also said, shares PR’s concerns and even has “many others” over the company’s reprivatization, in a process it classifies as “blunder after mess.”
The Liberal Initiative, through deputy Bernardo Blanco, said it echoes the “legitimate concerns” expressed by the president, namely on the issue of transparency: “The president had the same understanding as IL on that point.”
The minister responsible for TAP, João Galamba, remained silent – a minister Marcelo still believes should no longer be in government.
Source: DN
