US ECONOMICS

INTERNATIONAL TRADE

DoC. USITC. May 6, 2020. U.S. Department of Commerce to Initiate Section 232 Investigation into Mobile Crane Imports

WASHINGTON – U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross announced today that the Department will initiate an investigation into whether the quantities or circumstances of mobile crane imports into the United States threaten to impair the national security. This decision follows a petition filed by domestic producer, The Manitowoc Company, Inc. (Manitowoc), on December 19, 2019, requesting that the Department of Commerce launch an investigation into mobile crane imports under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as amended.  The investigation, to be conducted by the Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security, will provide the opportunity for public comment once the rule is posted in the Federal Register.

“We will conduct this review thoroughly and expeditiously,” said Secretary Ross. “This investigation will help determine whether mobile cranes are being imported in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair U.S. national security.”

Manitowoc alleges that increased imports of low-priced mobile cranes, particularly from Germany, Austria, and Japan, and intellectual property (IP) infringement by foreign competition,have harmed the domestic mobile crane manufacturing industry.The Department of Homeland Security has identified mobile cranes as a critical industry because of their extensive use in national defense applications, as well as in critical infrastructure sectors.

The petitioner claims the low-priced imports and IP infringement resulted in the closure of one of its two production facilities in the United States and eliminated hundreds of skilled manufacturing jobs in Wisconsin.  Manitowoc cites the U.S. International Trade Commission’s (USITC) Dataweb to note that imports of mobile cranes increased 152% between 2014 and 2019, and a 2015 finding that a Chinese manufacturer misappropriated six trade secrets and infringed on a patent, resulting in the USITC banning the sale of a Chinese crane in the United States.

5G

U.S. Department of State. 05/06/2020. Joint Statement on United States – Czech Republic Joint Declaration on 5G Security

Taking into account that secure fifth generation wireless communications networks (5G) will be vital to both future prosperity and national security, the United States and the Czech Republic declare their desire to strengthen our cooperation on 5G. 5G will enable a vast array of new applications, including the provision of critical services to the public, which will benefit our citizens and our economies. Increased amounts of data on 5G networks will further interconnect the economies of the world, including the United States and the Czech Republic, and facilitate cross-border services and commerce. Protecting communications networks from disruption or manipulation, and ensuring the privacy and individual liberties of the citizens of the United States and the Czech Republic are vital to ensuring that our people are able to take advantage of the tremendous economic opportunities 5G will enable.

Therefore, the United States and the Czech Republic welcome efforts such as the Council of the European Union “Conclusions on the significance of 5G to the European Economy and the need to mitigate security risks linked to 5G,” Communication From The Commission To The European Parliament, The Council, The European Economic And Social Committee And The Committee Of The Regions: Secure 5G deployment in the EU – Implementing the EU toolbox,” and the “Prague Proposals” as important steps toward developing a common approach to 5G network security. These proposals, adopted at a landmark conference hosted by the Czech government in May 2019, emphasize the need to develop and deploy 5G networks based on free and fair competition, transparency, and the rule of law.

The United States and the Czech Republic emphasize the importance of encouraging the participation of reliable and trustworthy network hardware and software suppliers in 5G markets, taking into account risk profile assessments, and promoting frameworks that effectively protect 5G networks from unauthorized access and interference. The United States and the Czech Republic further recognize that 5G suppliers should provide products and services that enable innovation and promote efficiency. The United States and the Czech Republic note that all countries share a responsibility to undertake a careful and balanced approach to network security, and the evaluation of 5G component and software providers.

To promote a vibrant and robust 5G ecosystem, a rigorous evaluation of suppliers and supply chains should take into account the rule of law; the security environment; ethical supplier practices; and a supplier’s compliance with security standards and best practices. Specifically, evaluations should include especially the following elements:

• Whether the network hardware and software suppliers are subject, without independent judicial review, to undue foreign influence;
• Whether the network hardware and software suppliers have transparent ownership, partnerships, and corporate governance structures;
• Whether the network hardware and software suppliers are committed to innovation and respect for intellectual property rights; and
• Whether the network hardware and software suppliers have a record of ethical corporate behavior and are subject to a legal regime that enforces transparent corporate practices.

The United States and the Czech Republic believe that it is critical for countries to transition from untrusted network hardware and software suppliers in existing networks to trusted ones through regular life cycle replacements. Such efforts will not only improve national security, but also provide opportunities for private sector innovators to succeed under free and fair competition and benefit our respective digital economies. Further, the United States and the Czech Republic support discussions on 5G security within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

CONSUMER CREDIT

FED. May 7, 2020. Consumer Credit

Notes about the Data

Starting with the April 2020 G.19 Consumer Credit statistical release, scheduled to be published on June 5, 2020, the release will no longer report the levels and flows of on-book loan balances and off-book securitized loan balances as separate line items. Instead, the release will report aggregate balances of total owned and managed receivables--the sum of on-book and off-book loan balances--for each sector. For more information, please see the announcement posted on March 6, 2020.

March 2020

Consumer credit increased at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1-3/4 percent during the first quarter. Revolving credit decreased at an annual rate of 10-1/4 percent, while nonrevolving credit increased at an annual rate of 6 percent. In March, revolving credit decreased at an annual rate of 31 percent, while nonrevolving credit increased at an annual rate of 6-1/4 percent.

FULL DOCUMENT: https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/g19/current/g19.pdf

CORONAVIRUS

U.S. Department of State. 05/07/2020. Secretary Michael R. Pompeo with Chris Stigall of The Chris Stigall Show. Michael R. Pompeo, Secretary of State

QUESTION:  Mr. Secretary, an honor to have you on the show this morning.  Hi.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Chris, it’s great to be with again.  How are you today?

QUESTION:  Doing very well, sir, thank you.  You’ve come a long way since your days as a member of the House of Representatives, sir.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Yes, sir.

QUESTION:  Do you miss those days?  What’s the difference in your life from being in the House of Representatives to today?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Oh, goodness.  It’s very different.  Both have been real opportunities to serve.  It was a lot of fun representing the people of South Central Kansas.  It’s been an incredible privilege to serve all of America, but first as the Director at the CIA and now as Secretary of State, to work as part of the Trump Administration to try to make sure every day that we secure freedom for every American.

QUESTION:  Of course, the CIA as well.  And that move initially when you made that move, I think a lot of people found it curious.  But I must tell you, and if I’m sucking up so be it, you’ve been outstanding.  I’m sure you were outstanding in both posts, but you became very highly visible as Secretary of State.  What is the difference in the two roles?  Could you explain?  Because obviously the CIA is obviously in the spotlight, too.  I know that’s your old post, but you’re much more visible now than you were then.  Isn’t that safe to say?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Well, first of all, that’s very kind.  Thanks for the kind words.  They’re very different roles.  The CIA director is behind the scenes, making sure that we collect the facts and data so that decision makers can have everything they need to form policy.

My current role is to help the President deliver on his foreign policy objective.  It’s a much more public-facing role.  It’s a role where I spend a lot more time on the road traveling around the world, working with our friends and partners to help ensure that they understand what America is looking to do and building out coalitions to help achieve that for the American people.

QUESTION:  Mr. Secretary, I guess I’ll start obviously with – if you Google your name today, it’s all the Wuhan lab.  It’s all the virus and China and whether Mike Pompeo in a combative – it’s always combative, a combative press exchange about whether or not the virus originated from a lab in Wuhan.  So where are we officially on that today?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  So it’s neither partisan, nor bullying, nor combative.  We’re trying to get answers for the world.  The Chinese Communist Party has not been forthcoming with the data set.  We know that it originated in Wuhan, China.  That much is certain.  What we don’t know yet is precisely where it came from and how it began to spread.  We can’t identify patient zero.  We’ve seen evidence that it came from the lab.  That may not be the case.

The people who can answer that question are the Chinese Communist Party.  They need to do that.  This is an ongoing challenge, as you well know.  We still have people getting sick.  We still have lost lives.  Our economy is still not back going.  And so we have an obligation even today to continue to demand that China share this information with the world so that our epidemiologists, our scientists, all the people who are trying to build out therapeutics and vaccines, can understand all that they need.

Shoot, we still don’t have samples of this virus, the original virus.  We need those.  The Chinese Government has those in their control.  The World Health Organization needs to ask China again and again and again to provide them.  This is an ongoing effort to deny the world the information that it needs to protect people all across the world.

QUESTION:  Sir, I say it with respect and I’m not trying to drag you into anything, nor do I think – you’re too smart to give up anything even if you – if you had it in you anyway.  But I will just say that an epidemiologist advising President Trump is a far different perspective than the Secretary of State Mike Pompeo advising President Trump.  I think you view this through an entirely different lens, particularly when we talk about the relationship of the World Health Organization and China and the things they said about this and their role in this.

I feel like medical folks are more inclined to want to give the WHO the benefit of the doubt, whereas the vast majority of us anyway – I can speak for this audience when I say we don’t – we don’t trust these organizations.  Increasingly, if you want to use the world, “globalist” organizations seem to be letting us down in big ways.  Can you illustrate your point of view on that?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Yeah.  So in this case, it’s absolutely true that the World Health Organization let us all down.  It didn’t declare a pandemic in a timely fashion.  It still is not holding China accountable for failing to disclose the information that the world needs.  That’s what it does, right?  The WHO is designed to have as one of its primary missions pandemic prevention, and then in the event there’s a pandemic to deliver good outcomes.

It’s not been able to do that.  President Trump has made clear that’s unacceptable to spend this much American taxpayer money for an institution that won’t work.  It’s just something we’re not going to do. So, we’re looking at it.  We’re trying to figure out are there pieces of it that still make sense?  It’s done good work in some places on polio and the like.

But in this event, it didn’t get it done.  Your point about different optics, we wish the WHO had been a scientific organization, relied on medical expertise, done the science piece of this right.  Instead it became a political institution that allowed the Chinese Communist Party to have influence in ways that were inconsistent with the data and the facts.  That’s what we are concerned about.  It’s why President Trump has said let’s take a time-out, let’s look at this, and let’s figure out how we can be an important part of global health policy, not only to help people all around the world, but as you can see, we got to get these things right all around the world to keep Americans safe too, and that’s what we’re going to do.

QUESTION:  Secretary of State Mike Pompeo with us this morning, and this is touchy, I understand, and difficult to answer.  But there are a whole lot of people that feel that this may have been – this is biological warfare, that this was purposeful, that this, for China, has the United States exactly where they want us: crippled, financially disabled, on our heels.  I hear that a lot.  I’m sure you do too.  So can you – I don’t know – either assuage our fears and concerns about that, or confirm them?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Well, we haven’t seen any evidence that this was a biological weapons effort that led to this.  Indeed, the Intelligence Community concluded that this was a – not a man-made virus.  Fair enough.

But what I can say is this:  President Trump singled out this threat from China back in the campaign back in 2016.  He came to understand that whether it was their military growth or the fact that they were stealing intellectual property, or their imprisonment of a thousand people in the western part of China – a million people because of their religious beliefs in the western part of China, he could see the risk associated with this communist regime, what they were doing to deny jobs and opportunity for the people of the United States of America.  And so this virus is the – just the latest symptom of this challenge, and we all – everybody in the Trump Administration understands what the President wants us to do to respond to this in a way that makes sure we take care of American workers, American people, and American families.

QUESTION:  I find it interesting, Mr. Secretary, that those that were so critical of this administration’s policy on our southern border suddenly became the most vociferous critics of the administration when they felt it wasn’t aggressive enough to stop travel from China, which was sort of an amazing turn of events.  They went from wanting the borders to the south open to even American citizens from China not allowed in.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  The irony has not escaped me, for sure.  Look, but the truth of the matter is we – this is not about politics for President Trump and our team.  This is about making sure that we protect Americans, we keep them safe, we do what we need to do.  His decision early on in the end of January that said hey, we can see what’s happening in Wuhan, we can see the challenge – let’s shut this down – was bold.  It was the first one that was made.  We were criticized for that; President was criticized for that.  It was the right answer.  It protected and preserved America.  We would be in a lot worse condition today had the President not made that decision.

QUESTION:  Is it safe to say China does not want to see another term of Donald Trump as President?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  I know this:  I hope that President Trump gets four more years.

QUESTION:  Let me ask you quickly about Kim Jong-un and South Korea – or North Korea.  What a bizarre set of circumstances.  We were told emergency surgery, maybe not well, maybe dead, then supposedly pictures.  Have you guys confirmed?  Is the guy alive, dead, what’s going on with him?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Yeah, we think he’s alive.  We watched what took place there, and all the while President was pretty clear:  Mike, don’t lose sight.  We have a mission set.  We want to do everything we can to convince the North Koreans, whoever’s in charge, that their nuclear program was not in their best interest, they would need to denuclearize.  We’ll need to be able to verify that that took place.  That’s what matters for the American people’s security, has been the singular focus of President Trump on North Korea since he’s taken office.

QUESTION:  Meanwhile, the Maduro regime still insinuating that we are actively sending people there to try to unseat him – physically do so – and they have a couple of our American citizens detained.  They claim they’re down there trying to make trouble for Maduro.  I know you’ve officially said that’s not the case, but it wouldn’t hurt your feelings to see him ousted.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  So no, we have been very clear:  Maduro must go.  This effort that we’ve seen the stories on these last few days was not an American effort, but we do believe that Maduro must go.  He’s indicted on narcotrafficking charges here in the United States.  This is a fellow who has wreaked enormous havoc in Venezuela.  We’ve now had six million Venezuelans have to leave their country.  What a calamity this socialism has brought to a once-rich nation.  We want to try and restore that democracy for the Venezuelan people.  It’s certainly important for them, but that will increase security for America as well.

QUESTION:  Finally, Mr. Secretary, I’ll ask you about this lockdown situation.  Here in Pennsylvania and neighboring New Jersey, much more restrictive than some other states that are reopening.  I know this isn’t really your purview, but I would just ask you generally:  Is it on your radar or are you thoughtful about what happens to people in this country when they’re just not allowed to work, when they’re just captive for weeks and weeks and weeks and weeks?  I don’t even want to talk about what-ifs, but I can tell you my mind does and has gone to some bad places at times.  Is that a thought?  Is that something you’re mindful of as Secretary of State?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Let me – so let me just say this as Mike, not as Secretary of State, because you’re right, we’ve got a big task force that’s working on this.  The President wants to get this economy cranked back up.  I’ve seen it, my family sees it, my friends see it, just like you and all of your listeners see it.  We are a people who like to be out.  We are – we like to work, we like to go to church, we like to be with our families on Wednesday night to go to the church chili cook-off.  All those things matter to us, and we need to have the opportunity to get back out and do that.  We obviously got to do it in a way that protects people.  I’ve got family members and friends who are older and at more risk, but there’s a way to do this in a thoughtful, responsible way, and we need to move out on that just as quickly as we can.

QUESTION:  I am genuinely thrilled to have you in such a prominent place in this administration, Mr. Secretary.  I think the world of you; I’m a big admirer.  I’m thrilled that we were able to talk to you this morning, and I hope we can do it more frequently.  Thanks for all you’re doing, sir.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Thank you very much, sir.  I look forward to it as well.  Bless you.  Have a good day.

U.S. Department of State. 05/07/2020. Secretary Michael R. Pompeo with Jack Heath of The Jack Heath Radio Show. Michael R. Pompeo, Secretary of State

QUESTION:  Mr. Secretary, thanks for joining us live on New Hampshire Today.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Great to be with you.

QUESTION:  My two questions for you – and I want to get right to it because we’re a little bit late going into this – I’ve been talking regularly on my morning show on the stations we’re on – I’d like to know how many actual cases there were in China or are, how many deaths.  I think it’s germane because it tells us what we’re dealing with.  I don’t believe a thing we’ve been hearing out of China.  I don’t believe that the state of Massachusetts neighboring has as many cases or deaths and – out of Wuhan.   So how many actual cases, Mr. Secretary, do our intelligence folks say happened in China and deaths?  And what was the source of this?  Did it – do we have evidence it came from the Wuhan lab or did it go bat-to-human?  Good morning.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Good morning.  And so those are great and important questions.  With respect to the source of the virus, look, we know this much:  We know that this originated in Wuhan, China.  That was challenged by the Chinese at the front end.  This administration was very clear we weren’t going to accept that disinformation, pushed back.  I think the whole world knows that this began and originated there in Wuhan.  Where exactly it came from, it matters.  We want to know the answers to that.  There’s evidence that it came from somewhere in the vicinity of the lab, but that could be wrong.  We need to get the answer to that.  It matters because we need to know where patient zero came from.  We need it for all of the epidemiological work that needs to be done to protect Americans today and tomorrow.

Second, with respect to the data set that’s coming out of China with respect to cases and deaths, I have no confidence in that data.  I see reporters report all the time that the United States has the most deaths and uses China’s data as being factual and accurate.  That’s a mistake; that’s an enormous mistake.  That data – there’s no reason to believe that information that’s coming out of China.  As for how many there were, we’re trying to figure our way through that, but we are watching what China has done.  And there’s no reason to believe that either the reported cases that are coming out of China or the death totals that they have provided remotely reflect what actually took place and continues to take place there.

QUESTION:  Mr. Secretary of State, why does our national media continue to take those numbers out of China and report them as gospel?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  It’s very unfortunate.  It’s unfortunate for the American people because they deserve to know the truth, the facts, the things that we can put our fingers on and say with certainty – and in this case, they can’t.  I – you’d have to ask them why they continue to report this information as if it was factual and accurate.  I think they know that it’s not.  I couldn’t tell you why they use that information and present it as if it’s representative of what really took place.

QUESTION:  Mr. Secretary, are we, the United States, working with any of the health care officials in China on a vaccination, or are we doing this independently through our private and public sector here?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  So, I don’t know all the details of precisely what’s going on, but I know there is a global effort.  So, we’re working with partners in many, many countries around the world, sharing information, sharing data, trying to get both therapeutics and a vaccine.  It is unfortunate that the Chinese Communist Party has chosen not to share their data, not to behave in a transparent way.  They have a special obligation – this is where it broke out – to share that data with the world, and they have chosen not to do so.  I think that’s indicative of what communist parties do.  It’s what communist institutions do.  Freedom-loving nations want information shared, want transparency, and want good things for people all around the world.

QUESTION:  Mr. Secretary – Secretary of State Mike Pompeo live on New Hampshire Today – when the President first started doing the briefings, he would start by talking about an update on that China virus.  Media would ask him why he was calling that; he said he wanted to be accurate.  It’s a virus and it came from China.  I’ve always wanted to know:  Why did the President stop referring to that?  Was there any pressure from China, the leader of China, to ask him to stop doing that or not?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  I don’t think the President changed much on China since he was campaigning.  I remember listening during the campaign, singling out China as a potential risk and threat to the American worker, workers in New Hampshire, workers all across America.  And as a CIA director first and now as his Secretary of State, I’ve watched him give us the space and the directive and the guidance to go make sure that we did the right thing for working people all across America, not letting China steal intellectual property, making sure that we had fair, reciprocal trade, making sure that our military had what it needed to push back against China where that poses potential threats, all of the things that emanated long before this virus, things that concerned us about the Chinese Communist Party long before this virus broke out.  We talked about this China virus – I think he’s been pretty clear when they accused it of coming from – if I remember right – an American soldier, the President was unambiguous about pushing back against their propaganda.

QUESTION:  Mr. Secretary, before we let you go – Mike Pompeo on New Hampshire Today – World Health Organization.  There have been a lot of questions about it.  The President recently talking about withholding funding, not too happy.  But I want to ask you.  You’re also, as you point out, the former CIA director.  You’ve seen a lot about the intelligence.  Can we trust the World Health Organization?  Were they complicit in underplaying the numbers out of China in the beginning?  Does China have undue influence over WHO or not?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Yeah.  I’ve spoken about this.  They didn’t get it right.  The WHO failed in its mission to provide the information to the world in a timely fashion about the risk that was emanating from China.  They knew it; they saw it.  There was pressure from the Chinese Government not to declare this a pandemic, and it became a political institution rather than a medical, scientific institution that it was designed to be.  And the President’s done the right thing, very consistent with what he always does – Mike, this isn’t working.  Let’s go take a look at it.  Let’s see if there’s a piece of this which we ought to continue to participate in because it’s doing good work on polio or whatever it may be, but then let’s make sure that when the next risk arises, when the next risk from a pandemic arises, we need an institution that’s going to deliver good outcomes for the American people.

QUESTION:  Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, thank you so much for joining us live on New Hampshire Today.  Love to get you back again soon.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  I’d be happy to do it.  Thank you.  Have a great day, sir.

DoC. EDA. May 7, 2020. U.S. Department of Commerce Announces Availability of $1.5 Billion in CARES Act Funds to Aid Communities Impacted by the Coronavirus Pandemic

WASHINGTON –  U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross today announced that the Department’s Economic Development Administration (EDA) is now accepting applications from eligible grantees for  Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) supplemental funds (EDA CARES Act Recovery Assistance) intended to help communities prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.

“President Trump is working tirelessly to make sure Americans stay safe during this crisis and that our economy is loaded to spring back when this global scourge recedes,” said Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross. “EDA CARES Act Recovery Assistance funds will support the long-term recovery of communities across the nation that have been impacted by the coronavirus pandemic.”

“EDA’s CARES Act Recovery Assistance is designed to provide a wide-range of financial assistance to communities and regions as they respond to and recover from the impacts of this  pandemic,” said Dana Gartzke, Performing the Delegated Duties of the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Economic Development. “We intend to deploy our CARES Act funding as quickly, effectively, and efficiently as possible, and in a manner that meets the needs of our  communities.”

On March 27, 2020, President Donald J. Trump signed the $2 trillion CARES Act into law. The CARES Act provides EDA with $1.5 billion of which $1.467 billion is available for grant making. The remaining funds will be transferred to cover salaries and expenses and oversight activities.

The Secretary’s announcement comes as EDA has published an Addendum to its Fiscal Year 2020 Public Works and Economic Adjustment Assistance Notice of Funding Opportunity (FY20 PWEAA NOFO) making the funds available.

Under this announcement, EDA will make CARES Act Recovery Assistance grants under the authority of its Economic Adjustment Assistance (EAA) program, which is intended to be flexible and responsive to the economic development needs and priorities of local and regional stakeholders.

EDA CARES Act Recovery Assistance investments will support a wide range of non-construction and construction activities, including Revolving Loan Funds, in regions across the country experiencing severe economic dislocations brought about by the coronavirus pandemic.

Examples of projects that EDA may fund through its CARES Act Recovery Assistance include economic recovery planning and preparing technical assistance strategies to address economic dislocations caused by the coronavirus pandemic, preparing or updating resiliency plans to respond to future pandemics, implementing entrepreneurial support programs to diversify economies, and constructing public works and facilities that will support economic recovery, including the deployment of broadband for purposes including supporting telehealth and remote learning for job skills.

Eligible applicants under the EAA program include a(n):

• District Organization;
• Indian Tribe or a consortium of Indian Tribes;
• State, county, city, or other political subdivision of a State, including a special purpose unit of a State or local government engaged in economic or infrastructure development activities, or a consortium of political subdivisions;
• Institution of higher education or a consortium of institutions of higher education; or
• Public or private non-profit organization or association acting in cooperation with officials of a political subdivision of a State.

For more information, please visit the EDA CARES Act Recovery Assistance page.

About the U.S. Economic Development Administration (www.eda.gov) The mission of the U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA) is to lead the federal economic development agenda by promoting competitiveness and preparing the nation's regions for growth and success in the worldwide economy. An agency within the U.S. Department of Commerce, EDA makes investments in economically distressed communities in order to create jobs for U.S. workers, promote American innovation, and accelerate long-term sustainable economic growth.

U.S. Department of State. 05/07/2020. Secretary Michael R. Pompeo with Steve Gruber of The Steve Gruber Show. Michael R. Pompeo, Secretary of State

QUESTION:  He joins us now, the Secretary of State of the United States Mike Pompeo on the line.  Mr. Secretary, good morning.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Good morning.  It’s great to be with you.

QUESTION:  Good to have you, sir.  The Chinese have made you quite a target here, as I was just sharing with the listeners.  And you say it’s because, well, all roads lead back to that virology lab in Wuhan.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  So, we know this for sure.  We know now that there’s been enormous global economic destruction and the loss of more than a quarter million lives – 70,000 of them here in the United States.  This is a catastrophe of real proportions that emanated from Wuhan, China and originated there.

And we know that the Chinese Communist Party didn’t share information in a timely fashion.  We know that they knew there were cases as certainly as early as December, maybe even earlier than that, and that they had doctors who were raising the red flag, saying hey, we got a problem, and they didn’t let them* speak.  They kicked journalists out, all the things that authoritarian regimes do.  As the President has said, had they behaved differently, there would be thousands more people still alive today and we’d have a lot less destruction to the global economy.

The Chinese Communist Party has a responsibility – it is ongoing – to share information in a transparent way.  And they’re still, even today, not doing that.

QUESTION:  And then they’re still trying to spread the propaganda.  And the tentacles of China, sir, reach deeply into United States media, into social media, and other places.  We’ve spent a lot of time talking about Russia, but on the world stage today I think it’s fair to say that China is the most dangerous adversary for the United States and for all Western governments.  Do you agree with that?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  I do.  The challenge that President Trump identified when he was campaigning back in 2016 was pretty clear.  He singled out China as a threat to the American worker.  It was most prominently discussed publicly in the trade context, the President saying hey, this isn’t fair, American workers are getting ripped off, and he aimed to create a fair and reciprocal trading system.  We’re still working on that.

But all the dimensions, the challenges that China presents – the theft of American intellectual property from people in Michigan who come up with a good idea, build a business, and then have the Chinese Communist Party steal that and abscond with the wealth and resources that would have flowed from that good idea – those are unacceptable things, are things that the Trump Administration is working to push back against.  All this long predates the challenge that this coronavirus now presents to the country.

QUESTION:  Yeah.  They come after us in technology, in military, in trade, in currency.  We’re looking at a world where the – well, the economics have been turned upside down.  We’re spending trillions of dollars to keep the American economy afloat.  It’s happening across Europe as well.  Thirty million Americans without jobs now.  How do we deal with the Chinese going forward?  Obviously, the President and yourself working on trade deals and tough negotiations leading up to this point, but where do we go from here?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  You made a really good point.  I think the whole world is now waking up.  I think they’ve seen what President Trump has done and they’re waking up to the challenge, as well.  The EU just the other day said that they had been naive with respect to the threat that China posed to Europeans.  I think the whole world can now see that this regime, this authoritarian regime, is just different than we are.

This is democracy.  Our government works to protect freedom, to secure our rights.  Their government is very different than that.  It imprisons a million people in the western country based just because of their religion.  And we can see the challenge this presents to our kids and grandkids.  And we’re determined.  We’re going to do the right things by building up our military.  We’re going to do the right things diplomatically.  We’re going to try and get a better trade relationship with them.

In the end, the Chinse Communist Party will have to decide:  Do they really want to participate as a member of civilized society, the nations that work towards better outcomes for people all across the world, or are they going to do what we’ve seen?  We all know the history of the Soviet Union.  Do they want to behave in a way that’s more consistent with what authoritarian regimes have done on this planet for an awfully long time?  If they do, I know that President Trump will do the right thing to make sure we protect the American people.

QUESTION:  U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo here in the No Panic Zone on the Steve Gruber Show.  Let me ask you about this: opening up the country.  We’re underway now.  We’ve got about a minute left here, sir.  We’re underway, opening up.  And I’m concerned when I see Bill de Blasio and others basically suspend the Constitution in pursuit of lockdowns and so forth.  What is your feeling?  Where do we go as far as opening the country up?  How do we do it?  And how do we do it quickly and safely?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  So not exactly my lane.  The Vice President’s task force is working on the domestic piece of this.  But your point is well taken.  The President has been clear.  We’ve got to get people back working, doing the things that they all love.  I was talking to some of my friends back in Kansas the other day.  They’re anxious to get the kids back to school and go back to do what they love – working, taking care of their family, going to church.

I do have a role in this.  We’re going to try and make sure that we can get airplanes back in the air, get – make sure the international commerce, so that when people want to sell goods to Europe, our famers want to sell things into Southeast Asia, that we have the capacity to do that as well.  It means we’ve got to get our systems back turned on.  And we are, throughout the administration, whether it’s our domestic team or my team here at the State Department, working to make sure we can do that.

QUESTION:  Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, I greatly appreciate the time today.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Thank you, sir.  You have a wonderful day.

U.S. Department of State. 05/07/2020. Secretary Michael R. Pompeo with Joe Kernen, Andrew Sorkin, and Rebecca Quick of CNBC’s Squawk Box. Michael R. Pompeo, Secretary of State

QUESTION:  Joining us now, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.  Mr. Secretary, it’s great to have you on, especially today.  And we’re going to get very quickly to some of your recent comments, but the lead story in the Journal, Mr. Secretary, the virus is widening the rift between the U.S. and China.  And just for argument’s sake, I just want to go back to something you said recently, “Today we’re finally realizing the degree to which the Chinese Communist Party is truly hostile to the United States and our values.”  Do you remember saying that?  Because it wasn’t yesterday or last week.  That was October.  That was pre-virus.  So, we were already there, and I assume in your view things have deteriorated from there.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Well, Joe, good morning.  President Trump in his campaign singled out China as a challenge, a threat to the United States, something that we had to deal with.  It’s not political.  It’s not partisan.  Republican administrations, Democrat administrations all ignored this rising challenge.  The President has taken it on in multiple ways.  We’ve seen it most publicly with respect to the trade deals that he’s been trying to get – fairness, reciprocity, making sure they don’t steal our intellectual property, all the things that matter an enormous amount to the economic well-being of the United States.

And then we’ve seen now recently with this virus, we’ve seen precisely – this is a symptom, right?  Authoritarian regimes go to ground.  They cover.  They deceive.  They put out disinformation.  They deny their people individual liberties.  All the things that we’ve known for so long.  We’ve dealt with communist regimes before.  We’re seeing it now again.  And President Trump is working diligently to make sure we secure freedom for the American people and do the things we need to do with respect to China to make sure that this next century is one where America can continue to thrive.

QUESTION:  The origin of the virus has been in the news for a while, in fact.  We had Senator Tom Cotton on weeks ago, probably months I would even say, and we had him on again recently, and said that the evidence has increased, as you have said, that maybe it originated not perhaps designed by the Chinese, but in a lab that wasn’t maintained at the highest level of safety standards that you would hope in a P4 lab and that maybe it escaped.  But Senator Cotton emphasizes that the evidence right now is circumstantial and probably will never be anything more than circumstantial.  So I’m just wondering whether you have something that’s not circumstantial or whether it’s helpful when all China is going to do is say that that’s disinformation from you, and then we say, well, when you say the U.S. military introduced it, that’s disinformation from the Communist Party, and we’re almost left with a he said/he said, or however you want to phrase it.  Is it productive if you don’t have direct evidence to say that there is a lot of it?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Joe, look, you know this; one man’s direct is another man’s circumstantial.  Here’s what we know for sure.  We know for sure that this virus originated in Wuhan, China and that the disease emanated around the world and the Chinese Communist Party covered this up.  We have been working diligently and are working diligently today to get the Chinese Communist Party to help us identify patient zero, where this began, how this came to be.  And this isn’t about politics.  This isn’t about partisanship.  This is about protecting Americans’ tomorrow.  This is an ongoing crisis.  The world’s epidemiologists still don’t know the origins of this virus.  The reason that we continue to ask for transparency and for a reliable partner in China is because it matters going forward.

Joe, not only do we have this current pandemic that’s taking place that we still have to figure out how to get therapeutics and get vaccines to market, all the things that we need this information that only the Chinese Communist Party has in its possession.  They are the only ones that can help the world resolve this today and for our American security.  But we got to make sure this doesn’t happen again.

You made a reference to the absence of high-quality standards inside of these labs.  The Chinese Communist Party runs a bunch of labs inside of China.  This is not the first time there has been a risk.  The SARS virus when it broke out, there were leaks from their labs.  We got to make sure that we get our arms around this, not only for today, but to protect the world going forward.

This is serious business.  I think the world can see the enormous economic pain that has been inflicted on the globe and now a quarter million lives, as reported.  I would argue the Chinese number’s not worth a darn, as you suggested.  A quarter million lives destroyed as a result of what happened in Wuhan, and the Chinese Government has an obligation to help us figure out how to make sure there aren’t increased lives lost as we move forward.

QUESTION:  Andrew has a question, Mr. Secretary.

QUESTION:  Thank you, Joe.  Mr. Secretary —

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Good morning.

QUESTION:  — in terms of the strategy of – good morning to you – of raising the rhetoric and perhaps the tensions with China, one of the things – and we’ve talked about it on the show over the past two days – that some health care professionals, even people within the diplomatic community, have mentioned is that right now, at least in this very moment, we are still very reliant on China for access to PPE and certain supplies that will be necessary for tests that we need right now and also for some of the drug development later in terms of supply chain.  And so what do you think the risk is towards raising some of these issues and raising some of the tension in terms of whether that’s going to put any of those supplies at risk or in jeopardy?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  We have an obligation to be truthful to the American people.  This is what democracies do.  We’re not raising the rhetoric.  We’re simply trying to protect the world from a global pandemic by sharing what we know and asking the Chinese Communist Party to do what they say they want to do.  They say they want to be a nation that participates in the global economy.  They say they want to be cooperative.  They say they love the World Health Organization.  Well, then do the right thing.  Share the information that you’re required to under international health regulations with the World Health Organization.  Do what you say you’re going to do.  This isn’t about rhetoric.  We’re not raising the rhetoric.  We’re trying to get the data set to save lives.

QUESTION:  The – what we did initially with the first phase of the trade negotiations, it was taken positively because of the prospect for much more progress being made in subsequent negotiations, Mr. Secretary.  Would you say that we still should be optimistic that anything can happen between these two countries with the way the rift is widening at this point based on the pandemic?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  We’re prepared to go work on these matters in good faith, just as the Trump administration has done for three years now, Joe.  So, the answer to that will turn on the decisions that the Chinese Communist Party leadership makes.  If they want to engage in the world, if they want to protect property rights, if they want to conduct fair and reciprocal trade, if they’re interested in that – which they tell us they are – then yeah, I think there’s a path forward to do that.

If they choose a different path, if they choose a path where they continue to operate in the way they’ve operated for the last 25 years, President Trump is just going to say “nope, that doesn’t work for the American people and the American worker,” and we’re going to head down a different path.  It will be – it will ultimately be up to them about whether they want to conduct trade in a way that is consistent with global practices.

QUESTION:  Becky.

QUESTION:  Secretary Pompeo, do you worry about the impact on tariffs, what that impact could potentially mean for businesses and consumers here in the United States, at a time when we’re facing unprecedented losses of jobs?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  I’m most concerned that China do what’s right for America’s workers and employers.  We’ve seen unfair trade relationship for an awfully long time.  President Trump has made a hallmark of this administration fixing that, so we can get our economy going, growing, doing the things that he promised he would do all along.  It’s what the trade team – Ambassador Lighthizer, Secretary Mnuchin – have been working on for a long time.  I hope we can get it done in a way – the President has said he’s happy to have no tariffs, no barriers, no nontariff barriers, free trade, reciprocal trade.  That’s what we’re shooting for.

QUESTION:  Mr. Secretary, just getting back quickly to the origin of the virus there, I was under the impression, and Dr. Fauci has made some comments, that it has been determined that maybe it escaped from a lab perhaps, but that the notion that it was designed or weaponized or created by the Chinese has been taken off the table.  But some recent comments you had are that even that you’re not completely convinced that this wasn’t actually made in a lab by the Chinese.  What can you add to that?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  I’ve seen some suggest that that’s what I said.  They were aiming to confuse and try and create friction inside the United States Government.  The fact is that the Intelligence Community has conducted its analysis with the information that it has available.  It has said that this was not a manmade virus.  I see no reason to dispute that.

The question that the Chinese Communist Party has to help the world answer is:  How did this come to be?  Where did it come from?  How did it get in the wild?  Where is patient zero?  All the things that free, freedom-loving nations that want to protect life around the world would share information on.  We still don’t have the virus sample in spite of repeated requests for it, and we need it.

QUESTION:  The action of the Chinese when this happened in terms of certain doctors not being able to speak out and – I mean, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it wasn’t from the wet markets, I guess, but some of the actions would certainly raise questions for how transparent everything was.

I think we’ve got to go.  Andrew, do you have a quick one for Mr. Secretary?

QUESTION:  I have a very quick one, Mr. Secretary, which is this.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Yes, sir.

QUESTION:  In terms of sharing information, but in this instance also sharing drugs, remdesivir, which we’re all thrilled and hope is going to help so many people, is going to be taken control of by the federal government in terms of its distribution.  And the question becomes how that’s going to be prioritized.  We all imagine it’s going to be prioritized within the United States, but what the implications of that may be internationally as we become or are reliant on other countries in part to help us with supply chains of the drugs in the future.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Yeah, Andrew, look, I hope when we get to each of these opportunities, whether it’s for therapeutics, things like remdesivir, all of the opportunities that I am confident we will generate, we’re going to work hard to make sure that we get this every place that is needed, whether that’s here in the United States or elsewhere.

As the President said, we don’t care who figures out how to solve this problem from an epidemiological standpoint; we want the whole world to resolve this crisis, this health crisis.

QUESTION:  Okay.  We second that, echo that sentiment.  Mr. Secretary, thanks once again.  Thanks for being with us.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Joe, Andrew, thank you all.

QUESTION:  Okay.  Thanks.


U.S. Department of State. 05/06/2020. Secretary Michael R. Pompeo With Lou Dobbs of Lou Dobbs Tonight. Michael R. Pompeo, Secretary of State. Washington, D.C.

QUESTION: Joining us tonight, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Mr. Secretary, great to have you with us. And the President today – moving straight to that issue – saying this is the worst attack – the pandemic that has struck this country and claimed so many lives is the worst attack in American history. Give us your thoughts.

SECRETARY POMPEO: Lou, thanks for having me on. It is undoubtedly the case that we’ve now had tens of thousands of lives lost here in the United States, enormous economic wealth destruction here in the United States and all around the world. What’s taken place here didn’t have to be. We know this virus came from Wuhan, China. We know that the Chinese knew about this at least by December and didn’t act fast enough; that the World Health Organization, at the behest of the Chinese, failed to declare this a pandemic in a timely fashion. These are the kind of things that caused this problem.

And I must say, Lou, even today as I sit here as we do this interview, we still don’t have the information we need. We still continue to implore the Chinese Government to turn over the samples, to allow Westerners in to look at these labs. We still need information not only to work on this particular crisis but to do everything we can to take down the risk that something like this could happen again.

QUESTION: Reports that the Chinese, the CCP, ordered the Wuhan laboratory, the virology laboratory there, to absolutely clean up, to destroy all specimens of the virus that they had on hand, all samples from the epidemic that broke out in Wuhan and Hubei province. Is there – have we confirmed that? Has the United States Government confirmed that?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Lou, I’ve seen those reports as well. I can’t say much about the intelligence we’ve collected with respect to this, but we know enough now to be confident of this: We saw what they did to the journalists that they kicked out, American journalists they kicked out; we saw what they did to some of the doctors who early on raised the flag and said hey, we’ve got a problem; we saw that they just wandered off, not to be seen again. We’ve seen this kind of behavior, this kind of activity. It’s what authoritarian regimes like the Chinese Communist Party do. They hide, they dissemble; they then propagate disinformation propaganda that we saw when they tried to pin it on the United States – it seems like forever ago, but just a few weeks back. Those are the kind of things that regimes like this do. It’s why democracies

flourish and authoritarian regimes treat their own people – there were thousands of lives lost in China, too – treat their own people with such little regard for life.

QUESTION: And complicating this, the World Health Organization and its role, hardly acting as an independent United Nations agency-in-arm, but rather as a satellite, if you will, of the Xi government, the – Dr. Tedros simply echoing the propaganda emanating from Beijing and Wuhan province about what had transpired, and I know the administration is considering a number of alternatives, amongst them creating an agency that would supplant, replace the World Health Organization itself. Can you tell us where the administration stands on that as of now?

SECRETARY POMPEO: I sure can, Lou. So the White House, secretaries, or myself are all trying to evaluate what’s the best path forward. Our mission given to us by the President is very clear. Allowing the World Health Organization to fail again is unacceptable. To put hundreds of millions of American dollars to the World Health Organization if it’s not going to deliver on the outcomes is unacceptable. So we’re working to deliver.

What does that look like? We’ve done this before. We’ve done this with PEPFAR, where Americans went in and took on the challenge of AIDS. We know how to run international health operations, and we are determined to find a good way so that we can be, as we have always been, the leader in global health policy. That’s saved lives all across the world. It’s saved American lives when we do it well, and President Trump has demanded that we do that in this situation as well.

The WHO simply didn’t accomplish what its intended mission was, and as the President says about organizations that are multilateral in nature, if they work, fine; if they don’t, we’re simply not going to be part of it.

QUESTION: Well, that’s straightforward. Mr. Secretary, the motivation of the Chinese here. What happened in Wuhan in that laboratory – the idea that this was a naturally occurring virus in – a virus that emanated from nature doesn’t really answer the question was it in any way a virus that was manipulated or engineered in any way as a bioweapon. We know the Chinese have a sophisticated biowarfare structure and capacity and – led by General Ho in the – at least in the planning and research stages.

Is – why are we not hearing more discussion about the actual construction of this – the construct – I’ll put it that way so as not to imply outright engineering – the construct of this virus? And why are people so eager to dismiss it – and by people, I’m referring to some of the public health authorities – to dismiss it as simply a natural phenomenon and that there is no sense looking at the evidence here; that is, the capacity of China in biowarfare shouldn’t even be considered, some are saying.

SECRETARY POMPEO: Lou, we’ve seen what our Intelligence Community said about this. I have no reason to disbelieve what they have concluded. But your point about the origin of this virus, the nature of it, how it got out into the wild in the way that it did, is something we still have lots of unanswered questions about. I have said before I’ve seen evidence that this likely came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Happy to see other evidence that disproves that.

We should get to the bottom of it. It’s why we’ve been asking for months now to give Westerners access to this information.

The people who can answer these questions, Lou, that you just described are the leaders of the Chinese Communist Party. They have an obligation to the world – not one from last month or two months ago, but one for today. They have an obligation to the world to share this information, to open up, to be transparent. China claims that that’s what they want; they want to be part of this great civilization of nations all around the world.

To do that, to be a reliable partner, you have to be transparent, and they have done exactly the opposite here. They’ve done what authoritarian regimes do, and that’s not only caused loss of life so far, but it continues to be a danger and a threat to the American people.

QUESTION: Well, as we wrap up, let me ask this: Are you in active conversations with the foreign minister, President Xi’s office, with the communist government of China right now?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Yes, we are in active conversations, urging them to do what I just described: to help us – not just the United States, but the world – understand how this could possibly have happened and how we take the actions to make sure that BSL level four, these high-end labs that the Chinese are running, operate in a way that’s safe and we don’t end up with infection all around the world again.

QUESTION: Secretary Mike Pompeo, always good to see you. Thanks for being with us this evening. Appreciate it.

U.S. Department of State. 05/06/2020. Secretary Michael R. Pompeo At a Press Availability. Michael R. Pompeo, Secretary of State. Washington, D.C. Press Briefing Room

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Good morning, everyone.  It’s been 128 days since Chinese doctor Ai Fen – the director of the Wuhan Central Hospital’s emergency unit – shared information on the internet about a patient with a SARS-like virus.  Her colleague, Dr. Li Wenliang, shared Dr. Ai’s report online with medical colleagues.

The next day, December 31st, regional health officials in Wuhan indicated they were treating dozens of patients with an unknown viral pneumonia.  And within days, Chinese officials detained Dr. Li and seven others for “spreading false statements on the internet.”

China saw then that it had an emerging public health crisis on its hands.  They knew.  China could have prevented the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people worldwide.  China could have spared the world a descent into global economic malaise.  They had a choice.

But instead, instead China covered up the outbreak in Wuhan.  Its National Health Commission ordered virus samples destroyed on January 3rd.  China “disappeared” brave Chinese citizens who raised alarms.  It deployed its propaganda organs to denounce those who politely called for simple transparency.

And that brings us to today, 120 days on.  China is still refusing to share the information we need to keep people safe, such as viral isolates, clinical specimens, and details about the many COVID-19 patients in December 2019, not to mention “patient zero.”

Our truth-telling and calls for transparency aren’t about politics.  It’s not about bullying.  It’s not about blame.  It’s about the ongoing need to save American lives.  This is an ongoing threat today.  Ask medical professionals in New York City.  I think they’ll agree with that.

We need countries to share reliable data in a timely way – now, and the next time that a calamity like this hits.  We need reliable partners.

As a result of China’s choices, countries are starting to understand the risk of doing business with the Chinese Communist Party and taking action to protect their people.  A few examples.  In recent weeks, Nigeria, Kazakhstan, and France have demarched the Chinese Communist Party ambassadors for a whole host of lies and misdeeds.

Spain has returned defective test kits made in China.  That country, the Czech Republic, other nations have received shoddy PPE, as well.  The Australians and the Swedes have called for an independent review into the outbreak.  And my friend Dominic Raab has said that the United Kingdom can’t go back to, quote, “business as usual,” end of quote, with Beijing.  Even the EU’s foreign affairs chief admitted that Brussels has been, quote, “a little naive,” end of quote, about China.

I’m heartened by this newfound realism.  The free nations of the world are starting to understand that China doesn’t share those democratic values that we hold dear, or their economic interests, and that this matters to the entire world.

There’s no true “win-win” with a communist regime, unless you get to the fair terms that President Trump has talked about and the reciprocity that President Trump did in the phase one trade deal.  Now countries have a chance to further insist on what’s right for their people.

Today I want to call upon all nations, including those in Europe, to support Taiwan’s participation as an observer at the World Health Assembly and in other relevant United Nations venues.  I also call upon WHO Director-General Tedros to invite Taiwan to observe this month’s WHA, as he has the power to do, and as his predecessors have done on multiple occasions.

Turning to the subject of those who are trying to do good around the world.  Today, the United States is committing an additional $130 million in global health and refugee assistance, bringing our total devoted to fighting COVID-19 to more than $900 million in more than 120 countries.  Congress has provided $2.4 billion in total.

This new tranche of funding provides more than more than $40 million in additional funds for countries in the Indo-Pacific, prioritizing places like India and Bangladesh and Indonesia.

We’ll also provide more than $20 million in global health assistance to Africa, with major investments in South Africa as well as in South Sudan.

We have allocated $11 million in contributions to the IAEA to support 83 member states in their fight.

I’m also happy today to announce $225 million in additional emergency aid to the people of Yemen, separate from the COVID-19 assistance that I just mentioned.

This assistance will provide the UN World Food Program’s emergency food operation in southern Yemen, as well as a reduced operation in northern Yemen, which the WFP was forced to scale down earlier this month because of ongoing interference of the Iran-backed Houthis.

Whether it’s our work in countering diseases like HIV/AIDS, malaria, TB, and now COVID-19, the State Department is very focused on saving lives.  And by implementing the Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance policy, President Trump’s administration has gone further than any in history in making sure that tax dollars do not subsidize the global abortion industry.  We’ll continue to do that.

A couple of quick items, and then I’ll take a handful of questions.  First, I mentioned Hong Kong last week.  Right now we are delaying our report to Congress that will assess Hong Kong’s autonomy, to allow us to account for any additional actions that Beijing may be contemplating in the run-up to the National People’s Congress that would further undermine the people of Hong Kong’s autonomy as promised by China when they entered the agreement with the people of Hong Kong.

Also, I’m excited to report that negotiations on the U.S.-UK Free Trade Agreement are now underway, something President Trump has sought for a long time.

A few matters related to the Islamic Republic of Iran.  Last week, the United States sanctioned an individual and his company who were doing business with the IRG Qods Force for years, generating revenue and resources for their terror campaign.  Anyone conducting business with Iranian entities should exercise extreme caution to ensure that they are not working with the IRGC.

And I’d like to take this moment to commend our German friends for banning Hizballah and taking strong action against suspected Hizballah supporters.  I hope that all other EU member states will follow.

Our gratitude also goes out to Switzerland, the United States protecting power in Iran for now four decades, for its efforts to extend Michael White’s medical furlough seeking – and seeking humanitarian furloughs for Siamak Namazi and Morad Tahbaz and bringing home all U.S. citizens wrongfully detained.  We welcome their assistance and we appreciate all that they’ve done.

We are not the only nation whose citizens are subject to the Iranian regime’s brutality.  I was appalled to see reports last week of Iranian guards on the border of Afghanistan’s Herat province abused, tortured, drowned Afghan migrants who dared to cross the border simply in search of food and work.  We encourage the Afghan authorities to undertake a full investigation and to seek to hold those perpetrators accountable.

Let me close on an upbeat note by mentioning two human rights victories.  First, the United States was pleased to see the transitional government in Sudan take the first steps to ban female genital mutilation and cutting.  It’s a big step, a bright step closer to a future in which all women and girls worldwide won’t have to suffer this barbaric practice.  It would be great to see nations like Somalia, Equatorial Guinea, and Djibouti, where FGM is widely practiced, follow Sudan’s lead.

Second, it’s only fitting that on the same weekend as International Press Freedom Day the family of Daniel Pearl successfully challenged a lower court ruling that overturned the conviction of four individuals responsible for Danny’s kidnapping and murder.  We welcome the Government of Pakistan’s commitment to ensure that justice is done in this case, including by filing their own appeal.

Finally, while on the topic of Southcentral Asia, I want to give a shout-out to one of my colleagues, Alice Wells, as she prepares to depart the State Department.  She’s done remarkable work.  I’ve worked closely with her.  She is an exemplary diplomat who for more than now three decades has served the American people.  I want to wish her all the best in her future endeavors.

Happy to take a couple of questions.

MS ORTAGUS:  Okay.  Nike.

QUESTION:  Good morning.  Thank you.  Good morning, Mr. Secretary.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Good morning.

QUESTION:  How are you?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  I’m good.  Hope you are well.

QUESTION:  On behalf of the press corps, we are very sorry for your recent loss.  Our deepest condolence to you and your family.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Oh, thank you.  That’s very kind.  Thank you.

QUESTION:  On China, what do you mean when you say there is enormous amount of evidence that the virus is from the Wuhan lab?  The reason I ask is because Army General Mark Milley said yesterday that we don’t know if the virus emerged from the Wuhan lab.  Separately, when the COVID-19 was gaining momentum in January and early February, did Chinese officials reassure American officials that it was under control and would be resolved on its own, maybe because of the warming weather?  Do you feel they misled you?  Is the administration pondering punitive measures on China?  Thank you.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  So I’ll take the questions in sequence.  So I saw General Milley’s statements.  Entirely consistent with what I think everyone in the administration has said, including President Trump.  The Intelligence Community is still figuring out precisely where this virus began.  Here’s how this could get solved really quickly:  The Chinese Community Party could do what they’re committed to do under their obligations to the World Health Organization, to be transparent, to be open, to do the simple things that nations all around the world do to make sure that pandemics like this don’t get out of control, and in fact, importantly, stay out of control.  I mentioned the number of days.  This is an ongoing challenge.  We still don’t have the samples that we need.  We still don’t have the access.  We collectively, the world, don’t have the samples.  It’s not even just that in the moment they couldn’t do the right thing; they continue to be opaque and they continue to deny access for this important information that our researchers, our epidemiologists need.

And importantly, this could happen again.  This – these are the kinds of risks.  This is why – this is why when I see people say, well, America is bullying the Chinese – we’re demanding of them only what we demand of every nation, right.  Be transparent.  Be open.  Be a reliable partner.  The very things they say – the Chinese say they want to cooperate.  Great.  Cooperation is about action.  It’s about opening up.  It’s about sharing this information.

So the details of where patient zero, where this began, are things that are knowledge that’s in the possession of only the Chinese Communist Party.  They’re the ones that can help unlock that.  If they need technical assistance, we’re happy to provide that assistance to them.  We do need – the world needs answers to these questions for not only the current moment but so that we can make sure that we reduce the risk that something like this could ever happen again with thousands and thousands of lives lost and enormous economic cost to the entire world.

As for the details, I think we’ve – the administration has laid out a timeline of what we’ve seen.  It is pretty clear that at the front end of this the Chinese Communist Party misled the world.  That is, they knew more and they didn’t share that, and they had an obligation to do so under the International Health Regulations that they are required to adhere to under World Health obligation– World Health Organization’s rules set.  They didn’t do that.  The World Health Organization also failed to do that.  And it’s not only that they didn’t enforce, but the World Health Organization needs to still demand that there be an investigation.  Dr. Tedros needs to be just as concerned as the United States and Australia and other countries are that we still don’t have access to the answers we need.

These are important issues that are ongoing, real issues, and we need to get them resolved.

MS ORTAGUS:  Michel.

QUESTION:  Thank you.  Mr. Secretary —

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Good morning.  Yes, sir.

QUESTION:  — sorry for your loss, first.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Thank you very much.

QUESTION:  On Israel, Israeli media has said that you are traveling to Israel next week.  Can you confirm that?  And on the other hand, Israeli defense officials said that Iranian forces are pulling out of Syria and closing military bases there.  Can you confirm these reports?  And since you mentioned Sudan, did you approve the nomination of Noureddine Sati as Sudan ambassador to Washington, and when are you planning to send a U.S. ambassador to Khartoum?  Thank you.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  So the last question is we’re working to get each of those things done with respect to Sudan.  We think what they’ve done is remarkable.  We want to support that, and so whether it’s their ambassadors being credentialed here and accepted here and us being prepared to send an ambassador there, we’re working our way through that.  We’re going to get it done just as quickly as we can.

I don’t have any travel to confirm, but I think in the upcoming hours and days you will see an announcement.  We’re hoping to get back out and be on the ground to do the things that the State Department needs to do that we physically need to be located in those places for.  We’re hoping we can get that started up before too long.  It’ll start off smaller, but we’re hoping to get back at it, just like we’re hoping that we can get the economy back open not only here in the United States but all across the world as well.

I don’t have anything that I can add to with respect of what the Israeli defense – I think it was an Israeli defense official that said that.  But we have been very clear to the Assad regime all along, and to the Russians in Syria:  The Iranians need to leave.  They need to leave not only the southwest corner that has a direct and real impact on Israel and risks to the Golan, but more broadly throughout the country.  The very terror regime that we talk about in the Islamic Republic of Iran has got a campaign that supports what Assad has done that has brutalized and destroyed the lives of hundreds of thousands, caused six or seven million people to have to flee Syria.  The Iranian regime is responsible for that in the same way that the Syrian regime is.  We hope that they’ll rethink that and get back to doing what Iran needs to do, which is to take care of its own people in this very difficult time inside the Islamic Republic of Iran.  We think those resources could be much better used to support the Iranian people.

MS ORTAGUS:  Rich.

QUESTION:  Mr. Secretary.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Rich, how are you?

QUESTION:  Good, how are you?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Way in the back today.

QUESTION:  Yeah, I know.  (Laughter.)

SECRETARY POMPEO:  I know.

QUESTION:  Good thing I have my contacts in today.  (Laughter.)  Would you be able to tell us, or does the U.S. know who may have initiated or bankrolled this operation in Venezuela from over the weekend?  And has the State Department started engaging the Maduro regime about the two Americans who are reportedly in custody there?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  So your first question, there – as I think the Secretary of Defense said, or maybe it was the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the President too, there was no U.S. Government direct involvement in this operation.  If we had been involved, it would have gone differently.  As for who bankrolled it, we’re not prepared to share any more information about what we know took place.  We’ll unpack that at an appropriate time.  We’ll share that information that makes good sense.  What was your second question, Rich?

QUESTION:  Just the two American citizens there —

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Yeah, we’re going to work on this.  It’s a consular matter in the sense of any time there are Americans that are detained someplace, we’ll work to get them back.  We will start the process of trying to figure a way if in fact these are Americans that are there, that we can figure a path forward.  We want to get every American back.  If the Maduro regime decides to hold them, we’ll use every tool that we have available to try and get them back.  It’s our responsibility to do so.

MS ORTAGUS:  Nick.

QUESTION:  Secretary, thank you very much.  You mentioned Dr. Ai Fen right at the top.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Yes.

QUESTION:  And I wanted to zoom in on something specifically you said about her.  She’s discussed publicly in an interview that has since disappeared many of the facts you mentioned, except for one.  You said that then National Health Commission ordered samples destroyed on the third; I believe that’s new.  Is that based on evidence that you have or is that based on public reporting?  And to zoom out a little bit on China, the U.S. and the EU, the EU has not joined your call to investigate China.  At the beginning, as you know, the U.S. didn’t participate in the EU vaccine donors conference.  Are the U.S. and the EU on the same page when it comes to China and COVID-19?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Let me see what I can get you that supports the statement that I made, see if we can get you material.  I’ll make sure the team does that.  Second, so the EU held a donors conference.  China was there.  So the party that perpetrated this, right – this began in Wuhan, China – was there, and we regretted there wasn’t a call for transparency from them.  I think that’s always appropriate.  They – it turned out, as I understand it, the Chinese Communist Party didn’t show up with a dime either.

I talked about all of the assistance that we’ve provided, we will continue to provide.  If you look at the response around the world, who it is that’s actually leading the response to this global pandemic, it is not close.  It is the United States of America, and it will continue to be so.

We’ll continue to work with our partners all across the EU, not just the French, the Brits, and the Germans, who sometimes are conflated with “the EU.”  We’re working with countries all across Europe.  We think they are coming to see, just as the United States sees with great clarity, how this came to be, how it could have  been different, and importantly, the things that need to change both now to prevent the ongoing crisis – the things I talked about in my opening remarks – and the things that need to change such that we reduce the risk that something like this ever happens again.  I think the people all across Europe are seeing how this came to be, and they are not going to tolerate business as usual as we move forward.

QUESTION:  Sir, just to – just to follow up, why not show up to that donors conference, then?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  We are going to do everything we can in every form to provide both the resources, technical skills, and the leadership to deliver a response here.  We’ll do that, and we’ll do that with our European partners.  We’ll find the right forms to do that.

MS ORTAGUS:  Okay, last question.  Barbara.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Oh, hi, Barbara.

QUESIOTN:  Mr. Secretary, hello.  I just want to go back to Nike’s question, because it’s kind of puzzling.  You had all of these statements.  General Milley, she mentioned about the – he doesn’t know.  Dr. Fauci said there was evidence that strongly indicated the virus evolved in nature, not in a lab —

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Yeah, no, that’s all – that’s all consistent.  That’s all —

QUESTION:  There are reports that intelligence-sharing among Five Eyes shows it’s very unlikely it came from a lab.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Barbara, Barbara, we’ve been through it.  Barbara —

QUESTION:  And so on.  So I’m just wondering —

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Yeah.

QUESTION:  And also, the IC statement last week doesn’t sort of talk about any evidence.  Are you basing your assertion on information —

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Barbara.

QUESTION:  That all of these parties do not have?  And a second question about the —

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Barbara, Barbara.  Let me just put this to bed.  Your efforts to try and find, just, to spend your whole life trying to drive a little wedge between senior American officials, it’s just – it’s just —

QUESTION:  No, we’re wondering where this strong evidence you’re talking about – because you’re the only one who’s saying that.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Barbara, every one of those statements is entirely consistent.  Every one of them.  Lay them down together, there’s no separation.  We’re all trying to figure out the right answer, we’re all trying to get to clarity.  There are different levels of certainty assessed at different places; that’s highly appropriate.  People stare at data sets and come to different levels of confidence.  Every one of us stares at this and knows the reality.  The reality is this came from Wuhan.  Every one of us stares at this situation and says, who can provide the answer to precisely where patient zero was from, where this actually came from?  We all know who can unlock the keys to that.  Every one of those leaders, whether it’s Dr. Fauci or General Milley, or myself, or the President, we all know how to get to this answer.  That’s where the focus needs to be.  It’s where our focus is.

QUESTION:  And have you made a formal request?  Have you asked the CDC to make a formal request for data access to the Wuhan lab?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Yeah, there have been many – there have been – that’s a great question.  There have been many formal requests, and we will continue to make formal requests for this information.

QUESTION:  Did you get a formal response from Beijing?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  You should ask Ambassador Cui, who had a great op-ed this morning, and I can’t wait for my daily column in the China Daily News.

MS ORTAGUS:  Okay, thanks.

QUESTION:  (Off-mike.)

MS ORTAGUS:  No, he’s got to go.  (Inaudible.)

SECRETARY POMPEO:  All right, go ahead.  Go ahead.

QUESTION:  One more question?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Go ahead.  Yeah.

QUESTION:  Following up on my colleague’s question, I actually have your statements from last week where you did a lot of interviews with some of – conservative colleagues.  Any time you want to come down and talk to us, by the way, feel free.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Can hardly wait.

QUESTION:  (Laughter.)  But seriously, but you said in multiple interviews on May 1st, April 30th, and other days some version of “We don’t know if the virus came from inside the lab in Wuhan.”  And then on Sunday, you said there’s enormous evidence the virus came from inside the lab.

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Those are both true.

QUESTION:  So did the intelligence change over the weekend?

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Those statements are both true.  They’re entirely consistent.  We – they’re entirely consistent.

QUESTION:  So then —

QUESTION:  Why are you highlighting one and not the other?

MS ORTAGUS:  Wait, wait.  Let’s not – it’s not (inaudible).

SECRETARY POMPEO:  This entire – I’ve now answered this question – I think it’s the 13th time.  Happy to try to answer it again.  I’m not sure what it is that – about the grammar that you can’t get.  We don’t have certainty, and there is significant evidence that this came from the laboratory.  Those statements can both be true.  I’ve made them both.  Administration officials have made them.  They’re all true.

QUESTION:  But then why —

SECRETARY POMPEO:  Focus on the most important piece here.  The most important piece here is that the American people remain at risk.  The American people remain at risk because we do not know – to your point, we don’t have certainty about whether it began in the lab or whether it began someplace else.  There’s an easy way to find out the answer to that: transparency, openness, the kinds of things that nations do when they really want to be part of solving a global pandemic, when they really want to participate in the things that keep human beings safe and get economies going back again.

We’ll continue to work on that, we’ll continue to get more certainty, and I hope – I hope we get an answer.  Where did patient zero begin, where precisely did this start?  I hope we get even more evidence about where it came from, and when we do, we’ll certainly make that clear as well.  So thanks, everybody.

QUESTION:  Is there a reason you (inaudible)?

MS ORTAGUS:  Just to correct the record, the Secretary’s done over 90 interviews in the past month, so – and he just did one with ABC, so – and he briefs here every week.  So just want to correct what Christina said.  Thank you.

U.S. Department of State. 05/06/2020. Secretary Pompeo’s Call with Republic of Korea Foreign Minister Kang

The below is attributable to Spokesperson Morgan Ortagus:

Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo spoke with Republic of Korea Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha yesterday to discuss the two countries’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Secretary Pompeo thanked Foreign Minister Kang for the close cooperation and information sharing on COVID-19 and reaffirmed the strength of the U.S.-ROK alliance, which continues to be the linchpin of peace and security in the Indo-Pacific and around the globe.

U.S. Department of State. 05/06/2020. Secretary Pompeo’s Call with Vietnamese DPM/FM Pham Binh Minh

The below is attributable to Spokesperson Morgan Ortagus:

Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo spoke yesterday with Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister Pham Binh Minh. Secretary Pompeo and DPM/FM Minh reaffirmed the strength of our Comprehensive Partnership as we celebrate a quarter century of U.S.-Vietnam diplomatic relations in 2020. They also discussed our two countries’ extensive coordination in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic. The Secretary and the DPM/FM agreed on the importance of ensuring freedom of the seas and the unfettered pursuit of economic opportunity throughout the Indo-Pacific region. The Secretary reiterated the United States’ strong support for Vietnam’s ASEAN Chairmanship and continued strengthening of the U.S.-ASEAN strategic partnership.

U.S. Department of State. 05/06/2020. Secretary Pompeo’s Call with Iraqi Prime Minister Kadhimi

The below is attributable to Spokesperson Morgan Ortagus:‎

Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo spoke today with Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi. Secretary Pompeo welcomed Prime Minister Kadhimi’s new government, which was confirmed by the Council of Representatives. They discussed the urgent hard work ahead for the Iraqi government, implementing reforms, addressing COVID-19, and fighting corruption. In support of the new government the United States will move forward with a 120-day electricity waiver as a display of our desire to help provide the right conditions for success. The Secretary and the Prime Minister also discussed the upcoming U.S.-Iraq strategic dialogue and how they look forward to working together to provide the Iraqi people the prosperity and security they deserve.

U.S. Department of State. 05/06/2020. Secretary Pompeo’s Call with Czech Prime Minister Babiš

The below is attributable to Spokesperson Morgan Ortagus:

Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo spoke with Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš today, the 75th anniversary of Western Czechoslovakia’s liberation by allied forces from Nazi occupation at the end of World War II.  Secretary Pompeo and Prime Minister Babiš adopted a U.S.-Czech Joint Declaration on 5G Security, reaffirming commitment to the Prague Proposals.  The Secretary and the Prime Minister also discussed the common fight against COVID-19 and our shared interest in strengthening our trade and investment ties, including support for an OECD-led solution to a digital services tax.  The Secretary reiterated concerns about increased propaganda and malign influence from the People’s Republic of China and Russia and its proxies.

________________

ORGANISMS

CORONAVIRUS

IMF. 05/07/2020. STATE-OWNED ENTERPRISES IN THE TIME OF COVID-19

• Vitor Gaspar, Director of the IMF's Fiscal Affairs Department
• Paulo Medas, Deputy Division Chief in the IMF’s Fiscal Affairs Department
• John Ralyea, Senior Economist in the IMF’s Fiscal Affairs Department.

The pandemic has highlighted the role of the public sector in saving lives and livelihoods. State-owned enterprises are part of that effort. They can be public utilities that provide essential services. Or public banks that provide loans to small businesses. But some are also struggling and adding to the burden on government finances. These range from national oil companies that are dealing with a large fall in oil prices, to national airlines without enough passengers traveling.

Most people encounter state-owned enterprises every day. They are likely to provide the water you drink, the electricity you use, and the bus or metro you ride to work or school. They come in all shapes and sizes. Some are fully owned by the government and some are jointly owned with private investors.

Our new Fiscal Monitor delves into this other government. How have state-owned enterprises evolved in recent decades? How can countries get the most out of them? At their best, they can help countries achieve economic and social goals. At their worst, they need large bailouts from taxpayers and hinder economic growth.  Which version you get boils down to good governance and accountability.

Big and complicated

State-owned enterprises are present in all countries. In some, like China, Germany, India, and Russia, they number in the thousands.

They are major players in many economies. For example, state-owned enterprises undertake 55 percent of total infrastructure investment in emerging and developing economies.

Some are also multinationals, operating around the world. The share of state-owned enterprises among the world’s 2000 largest firms doubled to 20 percent over the last two decades, driven by state-owned enterprises in emerging markets—their assets are worth $45 trillion, equivalent to half of global GDP.

The relationship between governments and state-owned enterprises is not always straightforward. Governments create the enterprises to meet specific goals and mandates, such as the provision of water, electricity, or transportation routes that the private sector would not find profitable. However, these mandates are often not appropriately funded, with consequences for people’s lives. State-owned enterprises are falling short in many developing countries, where more than 2 billion people remain without access to safe water and more than 0.8 billion lack reliable electricity.

Public banks are another example. Governments, such as in Brazil, Canada, Germany, and India have asked their public banks to help alleviate the impact of the current pandemic. However, many public banks have a poor record in promoting economic development (their main goal) and may take excessive risks, which leaves economies and people more vulnerable to crises.

Governments also struggle to effectively monitor state-owned enterprises. Many lack the capacity to do so. Poor transparency in public banks’ and enterprises’ activities remains an obstacle to accountability and oversight. This can lead to a buildup of large and hidden debts with governments having to bail them out, sometimes costing taxpayers more than 10 percent of GDP.

In these cases, the enterprises tend to underperform relative to their private sector peers. Drawing from a sample of about 1 million firms in 109 countries, we find that state-owned enterprises are less productive than private firms by one-third, on average. This weak performance is partially due to poor governance: productivity of these enterprises in countries with perceived lower corruption is more than three times higher than those in countries where corruption is seen as severe.

The internationalization of state-owned enterprises has also intensified concerns that they have an unfair advantage over private firms because of government support including cheap loans or tax benefits. This worry has long been present in domestic markets, but it has recently spilled across national borders and could fuel protectionist measures.

Bang for the taxpayer’s buck

In a time when governments are facing increasing demands and struggle with high debt, a core principle for state-owned enterprises is not to waste public resources. We make four main recommendations for how countries can improve the performance of state-owned enterprises:

1. Governments should regularly review if an enterprise is still necessary and whether it delivers value for taxpayers’ money. For example, Germany conducts biennial reviews. The case for having a state-owned enterprise in competitive sectors, such as manufacturing, is weaker because private firms usually provide goods and services more efficiently.
2. Countries need to create the right incentives for managers to perform and government agencies to properly oversee each enterprise. Full transparency in the activities of the enterprises is paramount to improve accountability and reduce corruption. Including state-owned enterprises in the budget and debt targets would also create greater incentives for fiscal discipline. Many aspects of these practices are in place, for example, in New Zealand.
3. Governments also need to ensure state-owned enterprises are properly funded to achieve their economic and social mandates, such as in Sweden. This is critical in responding to crises—so that public banks and utilities have enough resources to provide subsidized loans, water, and electricity during this pandemic—and in promoting development goals.
4. Ensuring a fair playing field for both state-owned enterprises and private firms would have positive effects by fostering greater productivity and avoiding protectionism. Some countries already limit preferential treatment of state-owned enterprises, like Australia and the European Union. Globally, a potential way forward is to agree on principles to guide state-owned enterprises’ international behavior.

The stakes are high. Well-governed and financially healthy state-owned enterprises can help combat crises such as the pandemic and promote development goals. However, to deliver on these, many need further reforms. Otherwise, the costs to society and the economy can be large.

FULL DOCUMENT: https://blogs.imf.org/2020/05/07/state-owned-enterprises-in-the-time-of-covid-19/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

THE WORLD BANK GROUP. 05/07/2020. COVID-19: Building a more resilient recovery

• Even as we help countries address immediate needs, we’re looking at how we can support policy reforms to facilitate faster, more resilient, and more equitable growth when the health crisis subsides.
• Last week: World Bank Group President David Malpass highlighted an important debt relief initiative for the world’s poorest countries and shared updates on other recent activities in his latest weekly update.
• Watch video: How can we build back better from a pandemic? COVID-19 threatens to push at least 40 million vulnerable people into extreme poverty, making our mission even more urgent. See how the Bank Group is helping.
• Medical supplies: In these dire circumstances, we are stepping up our support and offering a new procurement option to help countries access critically needed medical supplies.
• Putting money in people’s pockets: Given urgent food security concerns, prioritizing agriculture and food means putting money in people’s pockets and making sure food keeps moving for all.
• COVID-19 in Fragile Settings: Violent conflict often exacerbates the spread of infectious diseases. The global health emergency created by the coronavirus (COVID-19) is particularly concerning: it could become even more dire as it spreads to countries affected by fragility, conflict and violence.
• Transport and COVID-19: In just a few weeks, the pandemic has profoundly transformed the way we move people and goods. Could this help reinvent the future of transport?
• Tech startups weathering COVID-19: From prepping students for college to delivering fruit to those in quarantine, tech startups in the Maghreb are spearheading innovation and securing the delivery of essential services during these uncertain times.
• Related: Digital technologies are vital tools for helping people cope with stay-at-home orders and social distancing requirements during the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). But digital requires access to affordable and reliable internet connections.
• Nightlight mapping to visualize COVID-19: Nighttime lights in Wuhan, China tell us a story of how COVID-19 impacted the city. Satellite nightlight images mapping and remote sensing help visualize the impacts of the pandemic in cities.
• Health financing: It is crucial for countries confronting the coronavirus pandemic to adopt policies that increase resilience in health financing — the ability to absorb and respond to unpredictable shocks in health spending and revenue generation.
• Washing your hands with soap is the first line of defense against COVID-19. In Yemen, where more than 17 million people lack access, we're helping repair water and sanitation systems and distributing hygiene kits, chlorine tablets and disinfectants.
• Go deeper: Learn how the World Bank Group is responding to the COVID-19 (coronavirus) pandemic. Explore our multilingual portal. Click, bookmark and come back for updates.

Broad, fast action to save lives and help countries rebuild, by AXEL VAN TROTSENBURG

The COVID-19 pandemic is uncharted territory for every country in the world. It has unleashed both a global health emergency and an unprecedented economic crisis of historic magnitude. Even as the coronavirus continues to spread, the World Bank estimates that, between 2019 and 2020, the global economy will shrink by $4.2 trillion dollars.  That is substantially bigger than South Asia’s entire regional economy (which is about $3.5 trillion), and as if we somehow wiped both Germany and Belgium off the economic map. Worse still, the fall from where we expected to be in 2021 if COVID-19 hadn’t hit is closer to $7.5 trillion dollars—equivalent to 40% of the entire U.S. economy, as well as larger than the combined GDP of Latin America and the Caribbean plus the Middle East and North Africa.

While the economic scale of the crisis grabs attention, and could even paralyze us, the human toll is even more pressing. Millions of lives in the poorest countries are on the precipice. The contagion they face isn’t just the virus, as devastating as that will be, but its travelling companions of poverty, deprivation, even starvation. Without strong health care systems to break the stride of the disease—and with debt-laden economies suddenly starved of trade, remittances, investment, and jobs—it is only through global solidarity on an unprecedented scale that can we prevent a humanitarian catastrophe, and decades of progress against extreme poverty dissolving in front of our eyes.

The World Bank Group is committed to doing everything we can to help countries respond to the health emergency, contain the economic damage wherever possible , and start planning for their long-term recovery. We have set up fast-track financing for COVID-19 response efforts and have these underway already in over 60 client countries. Through a combination of new projects, restructuring and emergency components of existing projects, and deployment of our disaster finance instruments, we expect our COVID-19 work to be active in 100 countries by the end of this month.

Our response is targeted in four key areas:

• First, we are focused on saving lives by helping client countries implement emergency health operations. This means strengthening health facilities, ensuring that enough frontline health workers are in place and well trained, and helping the necessary medical supplies and equipment get through despite the added pressures on supply chains and trade flows. It means support for public health information campaigns, so that they have wide reach and effectively target the most at-risk groups. And since simple handwashing is critical to preventing illness and death, it means redoubling our efforts to extend the reach of water and sanitation. This includes support for short-term solutions where infrastructure is weak—which too often includes even hospitals in the poorest and most remote areas.
• Second, we are helping countries protect the poorest and most vulnerable. We are helping our clients expand the reach of social protection, both through new programs in response to the pandemic and a massive scale-up of existing programs, many of which have served far too few people to be sufficient for the current crisis. In Africa, for example, 80% of workers are in the informal sector, meaning not just that their jobs are at risk but that they’re outside the reach of most traditional cash transfers and other social protection programs. Africa also has well over 100 million people who are chronically on the verge of hunger; globally, the number of people facing acute food insecurity is likely to double by the end of the year. In many places, the pandemic compounds existing risks from climate change, conflict and violence, and weak governments—and even locust swarms , which are destroying crops and threatening food security across parts of Africa, the Arabian Peninsula, and South Asia.
• Third, we are working to save jobs and businesses. Due to the impacts of the COVID-19 crisis, four out of five people in the global workforce of 3.3 billion are currently affected by full or partial workplace closures. Nearly 80 percent of the world’s informal economy workers – 1.6 billion people – have faced severe constraints to earning a living as a result of COVID-19 lockdowns  and their involvement in hard-hit industries. As the informal sector accounts for up to 90 percent of workers in some emerging economies, the implications of lost wages will cascade from households to communities to whole societies. Without appropriate policy measures, these workers – many of whom are women – face higher risk of falling into poverty and greater challenges in regaining their livelihoods during the recovery. IFC and MIGA, the Bank Group’s private sector arms, are helping to cushion this impact through support to the private sector, so that companies can continue to operate and preserve jobs. We are also working to combat disruptions of supply chains, which are not only critical to the immediate health crisis but also play a key role in preventing hunger and preserving livelihoods.
• Fourth, we are building a more resilient recovery. Even as we help countries address immediate needs, we’re looking at how we can support policy reforms to facilitate faster, more resilient, and more equitable growth when the health crisis subsides. If countries want to rebuild stronger and be better prepared for future crises, they need start thinking about the recovery now , even though we appreciate how stretched everyone is by the initial battles with the coronavirus. It’s never been clearer, for example, how access to broadband internet is now essential infrastructure in every country, not just to keep businesses and government functions operating, but also to ensure that 1.5 billion students can keep learning when they can’t go to school. But becoming more resilient also means being clear about what technology can and can’t do: many children aren’t just missing out on face-to-face interaction with teachers, but also the nutrition they get from meals at school. And of course, many jobs, especially for the poor and vulnerable, can’t move online when there’s a lockdown.

The pandemic has already stalled or reversed growth around the world, and it’s likely to push 40 million to 60 million people into extreme poverty.  After decades of rapid improvement in living standards, the number of people falling into extreme poverty because of COVID-19 will be equivalent to the entire population of Colombia or Kenya, perhaps more.

For a crisis of this magnitude, the only viable option is an unprecedented, large, and coordinated global response. The World Bank Group is answering the call to act fast, and to act decisively. We must do everything possible to limit human suffering and to help countries find their way back to sustainable growth. Broad, fast action now can help ensure that this crisis does not turn into one of starvation, illiteracy, and social unrest.  By working in concert with governments, private sector, development partners and multilateral organizations, across the spectrum from public to private, we are demonstrating that we can meet this challenge. And it is by continuing this strong global collaboration that we will succeed.

FULL DOCUMENT: https://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/broad-fast-action-save-lives-and-help-countries-rebuild?cid=ECR_E_NewsletterWeekly_EN_EXT&deliveryName=DM63224

_______________

ECONOMIA BRASILEIRA / BRAZIL ECONOMICS

CORONAVÍRUS

FGV. 06/05/2020. Impactos do COVID-19. Gestão da complexidade na crise

Neste momento de pandemia, as empresas estão dependendo de decisões das autoridades em todos os níveis. Por isso, é importante avaliar a dimensão da crise para mapear o futuro da sua empresa. Mas, para isso, é necessário passar segurança psicológica aos funcionários e potencializar o capital humano, o que também é necessário para a saúde dos empregados. Com a implantação da segurança psicológica, o gestor passa a ter empregados preparados para dedicarem seus talentos nas situações mais adversas. Quem fala sobre o assunto é o professor indiano Umesh Mukhi, da FGV EAESP.

VÍDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDB2XoRrPCk&feature=youtu.be

IBGE. 07/05/2020. Novo coronavírus. IBGE divulga distribuição de médicos, enfermeiros, UTIs e respiradores no país

O IBGE divulgou nesta quinta-feira (7) a distribuição de médicos, enfermeiros, leitos de UTIs (unidades de terapia intensiva) e respiradores por unidades da federação e regiões do Brasil que são referência no atendimento de saúde de baixa e média complexidade. As informações, geradas com a colaboração da Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz), vão contribuir com as ações de enfrentamento à Covid-19 e estão disponíveis para consulta em mapas interativos do hotsite covid19.ibge.gov.br.

Também na página foi divulgada a distribuição de idosos e de domicílios adensados, aqueles com mais de três moradores por dormitório, com base no Censo Demográfico de 2010. A população que vive nessas casas tem mais chances de contágio e os idosos compõem o grupo de risco da doença provocada pelo novo coronavírus.

O levantamento tem como base o Cadastro Nacional de Estabelecimentos de Saúde 2019 (DataSUS), que reúne as redes pública e privada, e as Informações de Deslocamento para Serviços de Saúde, da pesquisa Regiões de Influência das Cidades 2018, cujos dados foram antecipados pelo IBGE. Também foram cruzadas informações do Censo Demográfico 2010 com a pesquisa Arranjos Populacionais e Concentrações Urbanas do Brasil 2015.

DF tem a melhor distribuição de médicos do país

Os dados mostram que, em 2019, o Distrito Federal possuía a melhor distribuição de médicos do país, com 338 profissionais por 100 mil habitantes. Em seguida, vem São Paulo com 260 médicos na mesma comparação. Rio de Janeiro (248), Rio Grande do Sul (244) e Espírito Santo (223) fecham o grupo dos cinco estados com os melhores indicadores.

Por outro lado, os estados com menos médicos estavam concentrados no Norte e no Nordeste do país. O Maranhão e o Pará registraram os menores indicadores, 81 e 85 médicos por 100 mil habitantes, respectivamente.

Os números também mostram a distribuição de médicos em regiões com mais de 500 mil habitantes que possuem um polo que é  referência regional nos atendimentos de saúde de média e baixa complexidade. Santarém, no Pará, tem uma população de 786 mil habitantes e índice de somente 58 médicos por 100 mil habitantes. Irecê, na Bahia, vem em seguida com 512 mil habitantes e 60 médicos.

Entre as regiões com mais de 100 mil habitantes, a situação é mais crítica em Capitão Poço e Cametá, ambas no Pará, com índice de 22 médicos, e 24 médicos por 100 mil habitantes.

“O recomendável são 80 médicos generalistas por 100 mil habitantes. Entretanto, esse parâmetro é válido para uma situação de normalidade. Neste momento de pandemia, essa recomendação deve ser relativizada, pois a demanda pelo sistema de saúde é maior”, disse o coordenador de Geografia e Meio Ambiente do IBGE, Cláudio Stenner.

Pará tem o menor índice de enfermeiros por habitantes

A distribuição de enfermeiros também é maior no Distrito Federal. São 198 profissionais por 100 mil habitantes. Tocantins (178), Paraíba (149), São Paulo (143), Rio de Janeiro (140) e Rio Grande do Sul (138) também se destacam na comparação.

O Pará tem o menor índice de enfermeiros: 76. Em seguida vem Alagoas e Goiás, com 101, Sergipe com 102, e Amazonas com 103 profissionais por 100 mil habitantes.

Também está localizada no Pará a região polarizada por uma cidade referência no atendimento regional com o menor índice de enfermeiros entre aquelas com mais de 500 mil habitantes: Marabá tem índice de 65 profissionais por 100 mil habitantes. Além disso, ao região de Belém deve ser destacada dada a sua população de 3,6 milhões de pessoas associada a um índice de 84 enfermeiros a cada 100 mil habitantes.

Norte e Nordeste tem menos respiradores que demais regiões

O cruzamento de dados também revela a distribuição de respiradores, equipamentos que realizam ventilação mecânica em pacientes com dificuldades respiratórias graves, nas unidades de saúde públicas e privadas do país. O Distrito Federal, novamente, lidera com índice de 63 respiradores por 100 mil habitantes, seguido pelo Rio de Janeiro (42), São Paulo (39), Mato Grosso (38) e Espírito Santo (35).

Estados do Norte e Nordeste são os menos equipados: Amapá (10 respiradores), Piauí (13), Maranhão (13), Alagoas (15) e Acre (16).

Entre as regiões de atendimento de saúde com mais de 500 mil habitantes, Santarém, no Pará, teve índice de 7 respiradores por 100 mil. A região, de atendimento de saúde, que tem a maior população, mas nenhum registro de respiradores foi Governador Nunes Freire, no Maranhão, somando 149 mil habitantes.

Nordeste tem regiões com mais de 200 mil habitantes sem leito de UTI

O Distrito Federal também possuía, no ano passado, o maior número de leitos de UTIs do país, fundamentais para o atendimento de pacientes graves com a Covid-19. Nas unidades de saúde da capital federal, o índice foi 30 leitos por 100 mil habitantes. Rio de Janeiro (25), Espírito Santo (20), São Paulo (19) e Paraná (18) são os estados melhores equipados.

Já Roraima apresentou índice de 4 de leitos de UTI, o menor do país. Amapá e Acre (5 leitos), Amazonas e Piauí (7), e o Tocantins, Maranhão e Pará (8) também registraram os menores indicadores.

Referência no atendimento de baixa e média complexidade, Vitória da Conquista, na Bahia, foi a cidade com mais de 500 mil habitantes com o menor índice de leitos de terapia intensiva do país (11). Aliás, estão no Nordeste as regiões com mais de 200 mil habitantes que não têm nenhum leito de UTI, com destaque para regiões do Ceará.

“Os dados mostram, de modo geral, que a desigualdade no país se repete na distribuição de recursos humanos e materiais na saúde. Sudeste e Sul são mais bem equipados que o Norte e Nordeste. Essa diferença também pode ser vista dentro dos próprios estados, como Minas Gerais, em que a distribuição é desigual por regiões”, comentou Cláudio Stenner.

Concentração de idosos é maior no Sul e Sudeste

O IBGE também disponibilizou a distribuição da população com mais de 60 anos no país, de acordo com o Censo 2010, já que os idosos compõem o grupo de risco da doença provocada pelo novo coronavírus. Os estados do Rio Grande do Sul e Rio de Janeiro possuíam mais de 13% da população nessa faixa etária. Paraíba (12%), Minas Gerais (11,8%), São Paulo (11,6%) e Paraná (11,2%) também têm número maior de idosos. Já o Amapá tinha o menor percentual (5,1%). O Norte, inclusive, era a região com a população mais jovem.

Quando se avalia as grandes concentrações urbanas do país, com mais de 1 milhão de habitantes, destacava-se o Rio de Janeiro (13,3%) e a Baixada Santista (13,2%) como as concentrações urbanas com maiores percentuais de população com 60 anos ou mais. Com menor percentual de população com 60 anos ou mais destacava-se Manau (6,0%) e Brasília (7,2%).

Outra preocupação no enfrentamento ao vírus é o número de pessoas que vivem sob o mesmo teto, já que é difícil prover o isolamento interno caso haja contágio. No Brasil, 18,4 milhões de pessoas (9,7% da população) moravam em domicílios com uma densidade de moradores por dormitório superior a três. Essa característica foi mais marcante na região Norte (com exceção de Rondônia e Tocantins) e no estado Maranhão.

“É notável neste indicador as diferenças existentes dentro das cidades, especialmente nas grandes metrópoles. Em áreas de aglomerados subnormais, como em partes da Rocinha, este indicador chega a 19%, contrastando com o percentual de 1,6% em partes de Copacabana, ambos no Rio de Janeiro”, disse Stenner.

DOCUMENTO: https://agenciadenoticias.ibge.gov.br/agencia-noticias/2012-agencia-de-noticias/noticias/27614-ibge-divulga-distribuicao-de-medicos-enfermeiros-utis-e-respiradores-no-pais

CNI. 07/05/2020. Três em cada quatro consumidores vão manter redução no consumo no pós-pandemia. A perda total ou em parte da renda mensal já atingiu 40% dos brasileiros e 77% dos que estão no mercado de trabalho têm medo de perder o emprego

O medo de perder o emprego e a intenção de manter reduzido o nível de consumo no cenário pós-coronavírus podem dificultar a retomada da economia. Pesquisa da Confederação Nacional da Industrial (CNI) revela que praticamente metade dos trabalhadores (48%) tem medo grande de perder o emprego. Somado ao percentual daqueles que têm medo médio (19%) ou pequeno (10%), o índice chega a 77%. Muitos dos entrevistados já sentiram o efeito da crise no bolso.

Do total de entrevistados, 23% já perderam totalmente a renda, e outros 17% tiveram redução no ganho mensal. Isso significa dizer que quatro em cada 10 brasileiros acima de 16 anos perderam poder de compra desde o início da pandemia.

“Há muito a ser feito nos próximos meses, mas devemos manter a confiança na ciência e na resistência da nossa economia. Certamente, com persistência e atuação conjunta, conseguiremos vencer o novo coronavírus, esse poderoso inimigo, superar a crise decorrente da pandemia e retomar a rota do desenvolvimento econômico e social do Brasil”, afitma o presidente da CNI, Robson Braga de Andrade.

A pesquisa da CNI, encomendada ao Instituto FSB Pesquisa, mostra que o impacto na renda e o medo do desemprego levaram 77% dos consumidores a reduzirem, durante este atual período de isolamento social na maioria dos estados brasileiros, o consumo de pelo menos um de 15 produtos testados. Apenas 23% dos entrevistados não reduziram em nada suas compras, na comparação com o hábito anterior à pandemia.

Perguntada sobre como pretende se comportar no futuro, a maioria dos brasileiros (percentuais que variam de 50% a 72%) planeja manter nível de consumo adotado durante o isolamento no pós-covid o, o que pode indicar que as pessoas não estão dispostas a retomar o mesmo patamar de compras que tinham antes.

Mas alguns segmentos podem ter uma volta mais acelerada. Ao todo, 46% dos brasileiros pretendem aumentar o consumo de, pelo menos, cinco itens do total de 15 testados após o fim do isolamento social. No total, 57% pretendem aumentar o patamar de consumo de ao menos um item, enquanto 44% afirmam que não aumentarão o nível de gasto com nenhum dos itens pesquisados.

Maioria dos brasileiros mantém apoio ao isolamento social

Apesar das perdas econômicas, os dados mostram que a população brasileira segue favorável ao isolamento social (86%) e quase todo mundo (93%) mudou sua rotina durante o período de isolamento, em diferentes graus. No cenário pós-pandemia, só 30% dos brasileiros falam em voltar a uma rotina igual à que tinham antes. Sobre o retorno ao trabalho após o fim do isolamento social, a maior parte dos trabalhadores formais e informais (43%) afirma sentir-se segura, enquanto 39% se dizem mais ou menos seguros e apenas 18%, inseguros.

“As atenções dos governos, das empresas e da sociedade devem estar voltadas, prioritariamente, para preservar vidas. Entretanto, é crucial que nos preocupemos também com a sobrevivência das empresas e  com a manutenção dos empregos. É preciso estabelecer uma estratégia consistente para que, no momento oportuno, seja possível promover uma retomada segura e gradativa das atividades empresariais”, comentou Robson Braga de Andrade.

Quase todos os entrevistados (96%) consideram importante que as empresas adotem medidas de segurança, como a distribuição de máscaras e a adoção de uma distância mínima entre os colaboradores. E, para 82% dos trabalhadores, essas medidas serão eficientes para proteger os empregados.

Pandemia agrava endividamento da população

Um dado preocupante apontado pela pesquisa é o endividamento, que atinge mais da metade da população (53%). O percentual é a soma dos 38% que já estavam endividados antes da pandemia e os 15% que contraíram dívidas nos últimos 40 dias, período que coincide com o início do isolamento social. E, dentre quem tem dívida, 40% afirmam que já estão com algum pagamento em atraso, sendo que a maioria destes (57%) passou a atrasar suas parcelas nos últimos 40 dias. De maneira geral, 9 em cada 10 entrevistados consideram grandes os impactos da pandemia de coronavírus na economia brasileira.

O levantamento foi realizado pelo Instituto FSB Pesquisa com 2.005 pessoas de todas as Unidades da Federação entre os dias 02 e 04 de maio e tem margem de erro de dois pontos percentuais. Em virtude do próprio isolamento social, as entrevistas foram realizadas por telefones fixos e móveis, em amostra representativa da população brasileira a partir de 16 anos.

DOCUMENTO: https://noticias.portaldaindustria.com.br/noticias/economia/tres-em-cada-quatro-consumidores-vao-manter-reducao-no-consumo-no-pos-pandemia/

INDÚSTRIA

CNI. 06/05/2020. Sistema Indústria busca manter ações, apesar dos cortes. Decisão do governo federal de reduzir em 50% as contribuições empresariais para o Sistema S, por 90 dias, diminuirá em R$ 1 bilhão as receitas de SESI e SENAI em 2020. O Sistema Indústria oferece 2,3 milhões de matrículas em educação profissional e 1,2 milhão de matrículas em educação básica

O corte de 50% nas contribuições das empresas para o Sistema S por 90 dias, uma das medidas adotada pelo governo para combater a pandemia do coronavírus, vai reduzir em pelo menos R$ 1 bilhão as receitas do Serviço Nacional de Aprendizagem Industrial (SENAI) e do Serviço Social da Indústria (SESI). Apesar da perda de receita, as entidades buscam preservar suas ações educacionais e sociais diante da crise, ainda que tenham que realizar ajustes em suas estruturas.

As duas entidades estão fazendo todos os esforços para honrar os compromissos assumidos com a sociedade, incluindo a manutenção dos empregos dos 62 mil colaboradores em todo o país, mas isso só será possível pelo período de 90 dias previsto na Medida Provisória 932/2020, que reduziu as contribuições. A MP também elevou em 100% a taxa cobrada pela Receita Federal para realizar o serviço de arrecadação, preservando os valores que ficam com o governo.

A perda de receita estimada poderá ser ainda maior em função da redução da atividade econômica provocada pela Covid-19, uma vez que a base de cálculo da contribuição compulsória das empresas será provavelmente menor. Se a redução da contribuição durar mais do que os 90 dias inicialmente previstos, até junho, poderão ser reduzidas vagas oferecidas na educação básica e na continuada, fechados centros de educação profissional e serviços tecnológicos, podendo também ser reduzido o número de vacinas aplicadas em ações do SESI.

Efeitos inevitáveis seriam o atraso na formação de mão de obra, piora nas iniciativas de educação básica de jovens de baixa renda e redução do atendimento à saúde do trabalhador. Também poderão ser afetados os serviços prestados pelo SENAI e pelo SESI para as 435 mil micro e pequenas empresas industriais existentes no país. Estas, embora isentas da contribuição, são beneficiadas pelas atividades de consultoria e apoio técnico, além dos cursos de qualificação profissional e serviços culturais e de assistência médica.

Efeito redistributivo

O presidente da Confederação Nacional da Indústria (CNI), Robson Braga de Andrade, destaca que a aplicação dos recursos do SESI e do SENAI têm um relevante caráter redistributivo, principalmente para regiões com pouca atividade industrial, que recebem recursos para que as duas entidades promovam a qualificação de trabalhadores e a atração de investimentos. Hoje, o Sistema Indústria oferece 2,3 milhões de matrículas em educação profissional e 1,2 milhão de matrículas em educação básica.

Também é realizado 1,4 milhão de ensaios laboratoriais, além da aplicação de 1,1 milhão de vacinas e do atendimento a 4,1 milhões de pessoas com serviços de saúde e segurança. O corte dos recursos que custeiam a estrutura de ciência e tecnologia poderá implicar, também, na demissão de especialistas e pesquisadores que formam a maior rede de apoio à inovação do país, que conta com 26 Institutos SENAI de Inovação, 58 Institutos SENAI de Tecnologia e nove Centros de Inovação SESI.

“Somos uma rede de proteção social dos trabalhadores da indústria e milhares de famílias brasileiras. O eventual corte aprofunda ainda mais a crise que estamos vivendo” - Robson Braga de Andrade

Além dessas ações tradicionais, em parceria com federações estaduais e associações setoriais da indústria, o SESI e o SENAI vêm realizando diversas ações de combate à pandemia, tais como o suprimento de hospitais públicos com insumos e equipamentos necessários ao tratamento da Covid-19 (máscaras, aventais, respiradores mecânicos, dentre outros) e a oferta gratuita de 100 mil vagas de cursos a distância. A princípio, todas essas ações serão mantidas durante a pandemia do novo coronavírus.

Robson Andrade afirma que serão empreendidos todos os esforços necessários para honrar os compromissos das entidades com a sociedade. “Ressaltamos, entretanto, que isso só será possível pelo período de 90 dias estabelecido na MP 932/2020 para a redução das contribuições do SESI e do SENAI”, alerta.

Federações estaduais

Dados preliminares da CNI mostram que, em apenas quatro das 27 unidades da Federação brasileira, o Sistema Indústria terá condições plenas de enfrentar três meses de cortes no orçamento, devido à especificidade das contribuições e da conformação do Produto Interno Bruto (PIB) industrial em cada estado e no Distrito Federal. “Somos uma rede de proteção social dos trabalhadores da indústria e milhares de famílias brasileiras. O eventual corte aprofunda ainda mais a crise que estamos vivendo”, diz Andrade.

Apesar dos riscos que o corte de recursos traz para as atividades desenvolvidas pelo Sistema Indústria, a CNI e as federações estaduais da indústria decidiram concordar com a aprovação, pelo Congresso Nacional, da Medida Provisória 932/2020. Tomada em reunião colegiada virtual, a decisão foi comunicada por meio de carta enviada no começo de abril ao presidente da Câmara dos Deputados, Rodrigo Maia (DEM-RJ), e  ao presidente do Senado Federal, Davi Alcolumbre (DEM-AP).

“No nosso entendimento, medida provisória não é instrumento legal nem legítimo para tal providência. Entretanto, de forma solidária, concordamos com a aprovação da MP, tendo em vista a gravidade do atual momento, bem como a necessidade de recursos por parte das empresas para manterem suas estruturas e preservarem empregos”, registra a CNI no documento enviado, também, a todos os senadores, deputados federais e presidentes do Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF), Dias Toffoli, e do Tribunal de Contas da União (TCU), José Múcio Monteiro.

Embora tenham concordado com o corte de 50% nas contribuições das empresas, a CNI e as federações estaduais manifestaram objeção veemente ao dispositivo da MP 932/2020, que aumenta de 3,5% para 7% a taxa de administração cobrada pela Receita Federal para fazer o recolhimento das contribuições compulsórias das empresas para, então, repassá-las às entidades dos serviços sociais autônomos.

“A nosso ver, trata-se de um contrassenso, uma vez que a justificativa declarada dessa MP é a desoneração das empresas, além de se tratar de uma medida meramente arrecadatória, sem qualquer justificativa ou conformidade com o momento atual”, diz o presidente da CNI.

DOCUMENTO: https://noticias.portaldaindustria.com.br/noticias/institucional/sistema-industria-busca-manter-acoes-apesar-dos-cortes/

POUPANÇA

BACEN. 07 Maio 2020. BC divulga o Relatório de Poupança de abril de 2020.​

DOCUMENTO: https://www.bcb.gov.br/detalhenoticia/17069/nota

BACEN. REUTERS. 7 DE MAIO DE 2020. Poupança tem captação mensal recorde de R$30,459 bi em abril

BRASÍLIA (Reuters) - A caderneta de poupança registrou entrada líquida de 30,459 bilhões de reais em abril, recorde histórico para qualquer mês na série do Banco Central iniciada em 1995, em mais um mês forte para a tradicional alternativa de investimento em meio à volatilidade nos mercados com a crise do coronavírus.

Segundo dados divulgados pelo Banco Central nesta quinta-feira, os depósitos superaram os saques em 24,615 bilhões de reais no Sistema Brasileiro de Poupança e Empréstimo (SBPE), ao passado que na poupança rural houve entrada de 5,844 bilhões de reais em abril.

Em abril, o governo promoveu liberações bilionárias de recursos para dar amparo aos brasileiros em meio à paralisação da atividade econômica.

Além de ter começado a pagar o auxílio de 600 reais a informais, com desembolso de 35,6 bilhões de reais no mês, o governo também antecipou para abril a primeira parcela do 13º de aposentados e pensionistas do INSS, adiantando 23 bilhões de reais aos beneficiários.

Em março, a poupança já havia registrado sua melhor marca para o mês, com captação de 12,169 bilhões de reais.

Nos quatro primeiros meses deste ano, houve aporte líquido de 26,700 bilhões de reais na poupança, contra retirada de 16,278 bilhões de reais em igual período do ano passado.

Por Marcela Ayres

COMÉRCIO EXTERIOR BRASILEIRO

CNI. 06/05/2020. Coronavírus: 58% das empresas exportadoras destacam medidas de facilitação de comércio para enfrentar crise. Consulta da CNI a 221 exportadores mostra que apenas uma pequena parte chegará em maio sem sofrer impactos nos negócios. Desburocratizar o comércio exterior se tornou a prioridade

No Brasil, Conselho que trataria de facilitação de comércio está desativado desde janeiro de 2019
A Confederação Nacional da Indústria (CNI) consultou 221 exportadores de todos os portes sobre as prioridades na agenda de enfrentamento da pandemia de Covid-19. Mais da metade (58%) deles indicaram a necessidade de medidas de facilitação e desburocratização do comércio exterior e 48% entendem que logística e infraestrutura das exportações e importações devem ser a pauta prioritária do governo nesse momento.

O diretor de Desenvolvimento Industrial da CNI, Carlos Eduardo Abijaodi, lembra que o Covid-19 representa uma grave ameaça global, com impactos significativos também no comércio internacional. Nesses primeiros meses da crise, as aduanas e secretarias de comércio dos países têm o desafio de serem mais ágeis nos controles aduaneiros, autorizações e licenciamentos para o desembaraço dos produtos e equipamentos.

No Brasil, o Comitê Nacional de Facilitação de Comércio (Confac) foi desativado em janeiro de 2019. O Comitê reúne os mais de 20 órgãos federais, incluindo ministérios e agências reguladoras, responsáveis pelo comércio exterior brasileiro, além do setor privado, para formular, implementar e coordenar medidas de facilitação do comércio exterior. Sua função principal é facilitar e desburocratizar as operações de exportação e importação conforme prevê o Acordo de Facilitação de Comércio da Organização Mundial do Comércio (OMC), ao qual o Brasil aderiu em 2017.

"Neste momento de grave crise, a falta de um arcabouço institucional como o Confac pode dificultar a adoção ágil e coordenada de medidas para aliviar os gargalos que afetam o comércio de medicamentos, equipamentos e suprimentos essenciais ao combate da pandemia. O Comitê também tem um papel fundamental para evitar interrupções na cadeia de suprimentos e evitar a criação de novas taxas, tarifas e encargos que oneram essas operações", afirma o diretor da CNI.

Abijaodi alerta para o risco de que cada órgão ou agência reguladora adote processos isolados e desarticulados de combate aos efeitos da pandemia. Segundo ele, a coordenação e o compartilhamento no âmbito do Comitê poderia dar celeridade e uniformizar os modelos de autorizações e anuências que os órgãos estão implantando neste período de crise, por exemplo.

“O devido funcionamento do Confac já era necessário para garantir os avanços do Brasil na área de facilitação de comercio. Agora ele se torna mais urgente diante do contexto dessa crise. E vale lembrar que a existência do Comitê é uma obrigação que o país assumiu na OMC"

Governo recebeu seis cartas sobre necessidade de reativar Conselho de Facilitação de Comércio

A Coalizão Empresarial para Facilitação de Comércio e Barreiras (CFB), secretariada pela CNI e composta por mais de 80 associações setoriais da indústria, agronegócio e serviços, e pelas Federações das Indústrias nos estados, já solicitou o reestabelecimento do Confac ao Ministério da Economia por meio de seis cartas para o governo.

Para o Confac voltar a atuar é necessária a publicação de um Decreto presidencial e a aprovação do regimento e composição do Comitê por meio de Resolução da Câmara de Comércio Exterior (CAMEX).

Há dois acordos internacionais, dos quais o Brasil faz parte, que tratam da redução da burocracia e dos custos nas operações de exportação e importação. São eles: o Acordo de Facilitação de Comércio da OMC, em vigor desde 2017, e, mais recentemente, após a aprovação no Congresso Nacional, a Convenção Internacional para Simplificação e Harmonização dos Regimes Aduaneiros (Convenção de Quioto Revisada) da Organização Mundial de Aduanas (OMA).

ABIEC. REUTERS. 7 DE MAIO DE 2020. Exportação de carne bovina do Brasil em 2020 deve superar recorde de 2019, diz Abiec
Por Nayara Figueiredo e Ana Mano

(Reuters) - As exportações brasileiras de carne bovina devem superar em 2020 o recorde de 7,6 bilhões de dólares registrado no ano passado, mesmo diante da crise do coronavírus, disse nesta quinta-feira o presidente da Associação Brasileira das Indústrias Exportadoras de Carnes (Abiec), Antônio Jorge Camardelli.

Segundo ele, quando acabar a pandemia, os países que tiverem as cadeias mais organizadas, como o Brasil, vão ter a chance de aumentar sua participação em mercados globais.

Durante participação em videoconferência, ele destacou que o país não conta com nenhuma unidade produtiva paralisada na área de bovinos, em função da pandemia.

Edição de Roberto Samora

EMBRAER. BNDES. REUTERS. 7 DE MAIO DE 2020. Embraer diz que discute com BNDES e bancos financiamento a capital de giro para exportações

SÃO PAULO (Reuters) - A Embraer informou nesta quinta-feira que está discutindo com o Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social (BNDES> e alguns bancos privados, no Brasil e no exterior, algumas propostas de financiamento, principalmente uma voltada para financiamento ao capital de giro para exportações.

No comunicado, a fabricante de aviões cita que o BNDES Pré-Embarque não altera o atual quadro acionário da companhia, “provendo capital de giro, reforço de capital e possibilitando a melhoria do perfil de endividamento”.

A companhia também acrescentou que outras linhas de financiamento alternativas, incluindo instrumentos conversíveis, estão sendo estudadas com a assessoria de bancos privados e podem vir a ser utilizadas caso a Embraer entenda que seja necessário e no interesse da empresa.

A Embraer ressaltou que, no momento, ainda não determinou o modelo de financiamento específico que será utilizado.

A Reuters publicou na véspera que a Embraer contratou o Itaú BBA, segundo duas das fontes, em um mandato que inclui as discussões com o BNDES mas pode ser expandido para busca de soluções estratégicas para a empresa depois do fracasso do negócio com a Boeing.

Por Paula Arend Laier

INVESTIMENTO

IPEA. 07/05/2020. Indicador Ipea aponta recuo de 8,9% nos investimentos em março. Resultado já reflete parcialmente os impactos econômicos da Covid-19, embora o 1º trimestre tenha fechado com alta de 1,7%

O Indicador Ipea Mensal de Formação Bruta de Capital Fixo (FBCF) apontou recuo (-8,9%) no mês de março, na comparação com fevereiro deste ano. O resultado já reflete parcialmente os impactos econômicos da pandemia de Covid-19, ainda que o indicador tenha encerrado o 1º trimestre 2020 com uma alta de 1,7%. Em comparação ao mesmo período de 2019, março registrou queda (-0,9%), enquanto o 1º trimestre apresentou alta de 4%. No acumulado em 12 meses, os investimentos cresceram 3%.

Os dados foram divulgados pelo Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada (Ipea), no blog da Carta de Conjuntura, nesta quinta-feira (07). O Indicador de Formação Bruta de Capital Fixo mede os investimentos em aumento da capacidade produtiva da economia e na reposição da depreciação do seu estoque de capital fixo.

Máquinas e equipamentos, construção civil e outros ativos fixos compõem a FBCF. Os investimentos em máquinas e equipamentos recuaram (-15,1%) em março, frente a fevereiro. Enquanto a produção nacional deste segmento destinada ao mercado interno caiu (-9,5%), a importação também obteve resultado negativo (-35,9%) no mesmo período. O indicador de construção civil caiu (-6,7 %) no terceiro mês do ano, o que contribuiu para o recuo de (-1%) na passagem entre o último trimestre de 2019 e o primeiro de 2020.

Em relação a março de 2019, a construção civil teve uma variação negativa (-2%), enquanto o segmento máquinas e equipamentos registrou alta de 0,9 %. Já na comparação entre o primeiro trimestre de 2020 e o do ano passado, o crescimento foi generalizado nos componentes da FBCF.

Indicador Ipea de FBCF – Março e Primeiro Trimestre de 2020. Investimentos apresentam recuo de 8,9% em março, mas encerram o primeiro trimestre do ano com alta de 1,7%. Por Leonardo Mello de Carvalho

O Indicador Ipea de Formação Bruta de Capital Fixo (FBCF) aponta um recuo de 8,9% na comparação entre março e fevereiro de 2020, na série com ajuste sazonal. O resultado já reflete parcialmente os impactos econômicos da pandemia da Covid-19. Ainda assim, o primeiro trimestre de 2020 fechou com uma alta de 1,7%, também na série dessazonalizada, o que é explicado pela aceleração observada nos primeiros dois meses do ano, além de uma baixa base de comparação referente ao quarto trimestre de 2019. Nas comparações com os mesmos períodos de 2019, enquanto março registrou uma queda de 0,9%, o primeiro trimestre encerrou com uma alta de 4%. No acumulado em doze meses, os investimentos cresceram 3%.

Na comparação com o ajuste sazonal, o consumo aparente de máquinas e equipamentos – cujo valor corresponde à sua produção nacional destinada ao mercado interno acrescida às importações – apresentou uma retração de 15,1% em março, encerrando o primeiro trimestre com um avanço de 6,6%. De acordo com os seus componentes, enquanto a produção nacional de máquinas e equipamentos recuou 9,5% em março, a importação caiu 35,9% no mesmo período.

O indicador de construção civil, por sua vez, recuou 6,7% em março, na série dessazonalizada. Com isso, o segmento registrou um recuo de 1% na passagem entre o último trimestre de 2019 e o primeiro de 2020.

Na comparação com o mesmo período do ano anterior, enquanto a construção civil e o componente outros registraram ambos uma variação negativa de 2%, o segmento máquinas e equipamentos registrou uma alta de 0,9% em relação a março de 2019. Já na comparação trimestral, o crescimento foi generalizado.

ÁGUA

IBGE. 07/05/2020. Em 2017, o Brasil consumia 6,3 litros d’água para cada R$ 1 gerado pela economia

Em 2017, o consumo total de água, que corresponde à água utilizada menos a água que retorna para o meio ambiente, foi de 329,8 mil hm3 (329,8 trilhões de litros). A principal atividade responsável pelo consumo de água foi Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal, pesca e aquicultura (97,4%).

Em 2017, para cada R$ 1,00 de Valor Adicionado Bruto gerado, foram consumidos aproximadamente 6,3 litros de água. No entanto, o resultado desse indicador para Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal, pesca e aquicultura foi de 1.061 litros/R$. Se descontarmos o volume de água do solo utilizado por essa atividade, foram necessários 96 litros/R$ em 2017.

Entre as grandes regiões, em 2017, considerando a água de solo, o Centro-Oeste apresentou a maior intensidade de consumo de água, com 1.511,9 litros para cada R$ 1 gerado na região. Sem incluir o volume de água do solo, o Nordeste tinha o maior resultado, com 151,4 litros para cada R$ 1 gerado.

No Brasil, em 2017, houve uma retirada total de água (tanto a retirada para atendimento próprio quanto a captação de água para fins de distribuição) de aproximadamente 3,7 milhões de hm³ (3,7 quatrilhões de litros). A participação da Hidroenergia na retirada foi de 83,0%, embora o volume de água captado por esta atividade seja quase todo utilizado e retornado na mesma quantidade e qualidade. Entre as grandes regiões, o Sudeste teve a maior participação na retirada total de água em todos os anos da série 2013-2017.

Com relação ao uso de água de distribuição, a região com a maior participação, em 2017, foi o Sudeste (45%), seguido do Nordeste (29%), Sul (14%), Centro-oeste (6%) e Norte (6%).
Em 2017, as adições no estoque total de água do Brasil foram de 27 milhões de hm³ (27 quatrilhões de litros). A precipitação (chuva) foi o principal responsável (51,1%), seguida das entradas de outros países a montante e de outros recursos no território (36,4%) e o retorno ao meio ambiente por parte das atividades econômicas (12,5%). O volume de precipitação teve uma queda acumulada de 13% entre 2013 e 2016, voltando a crescer 6% de 2016 para 2017.

Em 2017, no Brasil, o uso per capita de água pelas Famílias foi de 116 litros diários. Entre as grandes regiões o Sudeste registra o maior uso per capita, com 143 litros, enquanto o menor uso é registrado no Nordeste, com 83 litros por habitante/dia.

Em 2017, a atividade Água e esgoto correspondeu a 0,6% do Valor Adicionado Bruto (VAB) corrente do total da economia. O valor da produção de água de distribuição e serviços de esgoto foi R$ 56,5 bilhões em 2017, sendo a água de distribuição responsável por 65,9% desse total.

Essas são algumas das informações das Contas Econômicas Ambientais da Água do Brasil (CEAA) 2013-2017, resultado de uma cooperação entre o IBGE, a Agência Nacional de Águas (ANA), com o apoio técnico da Agência Internacional de Cooperação Alemã para o Desenvolvimento Sustentável (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit – GIZ GmbH), por intermédio do Ministério do Meio Ambiente (MMA), e da União Europeia, no âmbito do projeto Natural Capital Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services (NCAVES).

Além de trazer uma revisão das estimativas da série de 2013 a 2017, essa também é a primeira vez que a publicação apresenta dados com detalhamento por grandes regiões.

Consumo total de água no país foi de 329,8 trilhões de litros em 2017

Em 2017, o consumo total de água, que corresponde à água utilizada menos a água que retorna para o meio ambiente, foi de 329,8 trilhões de litros. Os principais responsáveis pelo consumo de água foram a Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal, pesca e aquicultura (97,4%), que tem como destaque a agricultura de sequeiro (não irrigada); Indústria de transformação e construção (1,0%) e Água e esgoto (0,8%).

O retorno da água para o meio ambiente pode ocorrer através da coleta pela atividade Água e esgoto ou do lançamento direto pelas atividades econômicas e Famílias. No ano de 2017, o retorno total foi de 3,4 quatrilhões de litros. Excluindo-se a atividade Hidroenergia, a água de chuva que passa pelas redes pluviais e a atividade Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal e pesca, que não utiliza o sistema de esgoto no seu retorno, o retorno total foi de 22,1 trilhões de litros. Desse total, 28,9% ocorreu através dos sistemas de esgoto e o restante foi lançado diretamente no meio ambiente. No âmbito das Famílias, o percentual de retorno que passa pelo setor de esgoto em relação ao uso da água é de 57,2%, ou seja, 42,8% do total da água que as Famílias usam é lançado diretamente no meio ambiente.

Intensidade do consumo de água (litros/R$)
Atividades econômicas	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal, pesca e aquicultura	1.324,9	1.265,0	1.290,2	1.053,8	1.060,5
Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal, pesca e aquicultura (sem água do solo)	104,9	108,9	109,5	95,5	95,5
Indústrias extrativas	1,4	1,5	2,5	5,2	3,4
Indústrias de transformação e construção	4,4	3,9	3,6	3,4	3,4
Eletricidade e gás	1,5	1,8	1,2	0,8	0,7
Demais atividades	0,2	0,1	0,1	0,1	0,1

Cada R$ 1 de Valor Adicionado Bruto consumiu 6,3 litros de água em 2017

O indicador de intensidade do consumo da água mostra a vazão consumida, em litros, de água para cada real de Valor Adicionado Bruto (VAB) gerado pelas atividades econômicas. Em 2017, para cada R$ 1,00 de VAB, foram consumidos 6,3 litros de água. O resultado desse indicador para Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal, pesca e aquicultura foi de 1.061 litros/R$. O setor agrícola é responsável pelas maiores vazões consumidas no país. No acumulado de 2013 a 2017, o consumo de água caiu 19,9%. Se descontarmos o volume de água do solo utilizado pela agricultura, ou seja, se considerarmos apenas a água proveniente de irrigação, o indicador passa a ser de 96 litros/R$ em 2017.

Analisando-se o custo médio por volume de água utilizado (relacionando-se os gastos de consumo intermediário com água de distribuição com as vazões de água recebidas da atividade Água e esgoto), observa-se que, em 2017, o custo médio para a Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal, pesca e aquicultura foi de R$ 0,06/m³, onde o volume de água advindo do abastecimento foi, predominantemente, oriundo dos perímetros públicos de irrigação (PPI). Para o total das atividades econômicas, excluindo a atividade Água e esgoto, o custo médio por volume de água utilizada foi de R$ 3,12/m³. Similarmente, através dos gastos de consumo final, chegou-se a R$ 2,96/m³ para as Famílias.

A análise da série histórica da atividade Captação, tratamento e distribuição da água mostra uma queda acumulada no volume de água retirada para distribuição (-2,7%) entre 2013 e 2015, seguido de crescimento acumulado entre 2015 e 2017 (3,3%). De 2013 a 2017 o crescimento médio foi de 0,1%. O movimento de queda, seguido de recuperação, foi influenciado pela crise hídrica ocorrida em 2014 e 2015. Seus maiores usuários, isto é, as Famílias, a Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal e pesca e as Demais atividades, foram responsáveis por 63,7%, 19,8% e 14,5% do uso de água de distribuição na economia em 2017, respectivamente.

Entre 2013 e 2017, as Famílias e Demais atividades registraram, em média, -0,1% e -2,2%, respectivamente, no total de água utilizada por ano. Já a atividade Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal e pesca apresentou crescimento médio de 2,0% no mesmo período. Com relação aos gastos na série temporal 2013-2017, as despesas com água de abastecimento das Famílias e das Demais atividades tiveram crescimento de 10,6% e 6,8%, em média, no período, respectivamente.

Intensidade do consumo de água (litros/R$) - 2017
	N	NE	SE	S	CO
Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal, pesca e aquicultura	482,3	762,5	1.289,8	984,0	1.511,9
Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal, pesca e aquicultura (sem água do solo)	38,1	151,4	116,5	86,4	63,3
Indústrias extrativas	4,6	1,7	2,8	10,3	7,0
Indústrias de transformação e construção	1,2	7,1	3,0	1,8	6,5
Eletricidade e gás	0,2	1,4	0,8	0,6	0,2
Demais atividades	0,3	0,1	0,1	0,1	0,0

Entre as grandes regiões, em 2017, o Centro-Oeste apresentou a maior intensidade de consumo de água, com 1.511,9 litros para cada 1 R$ gerado na região, explicada, entre outros fatores, pela grande concentração das atividades agrícolas de sequeiro. Se considerarmos a intensidade do consumo de água sem o volume de água do solo, a região Nordeste apresenta maior resultado, com 151,4 litros para cada R$ que a atividade gera, sobretudo em função das características climáticas do Semiárido e das características fisiológicas dos principais cultivos da região.

Retirada total de água da economia foi de 3,7 milhões de hm3

No Brasil, em 2017, houve uma retirada total de água (tanto a retirada para atendimento próprio quanto a captação de água para fins de distribuição) de aproximadamente 3,7 quatrilhões de litros.

Em âmbito nacional, a atividade econômica que mais contribui para o volume de retirada total é a Eletricidade e gás, devido à grande quantidade de água turbinada pelas hidrelétricas e a participação majoritária destas na geração elétrica brasileira. Em 2017, a participação da Hidroenergia foi de 83,0%, embora o volume de água captado por esta atividade seja quase todo utilizado e retornado na mesma quantidade e qualidade, o que é caracterizado como um uso não-consuntivo. Entre as grandes regiões, o Sudeste teve a maior participação na retirada total de água em todos os anos da série 2013-2017.

Já na atividade Esgoto e atividades relacionadas, a retirada de água corresponde à coleta de água da chuva que é escoada pelas redes pluviais, registrada com o mesmo volume tanto em retirada quanto em retorno ao meio ambiente. Em 2017, esse volume correspondeu a 0,8% da retirada total de água.

Excluindo-se as duas atividades acima, as principais captações diretas de água, ou seja, que consideram apenas o uso consuntivo são: Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal e pesca (94,5%) e Captação, tratamento e distribuição da água (3,2%).

Na classificação por tipo de água, em 2017, 93,5% do volume de água retirada pela atividade de Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal e pesca veio da água armazenada no solo (usada principalmente pela agricultura de sequeiro, não irrigada) e o restante se deu em corpos hídricos superficiais e subterrâneos.

Entre as grandes regiões, considerando apenas os usos em que há consumo de água (usos consuntivos), o maior volume de retirada total de água é registrado na região Centro-oeste (30%), principalmente por causa da agricultura de sequeiro, seguido do Sudeste (26%), Sul (25%), Nordeste (12%) e Norte (7%).

Considerando apenas as retiradas de águas superficiais e águas subterrâneas pelas atividades econômicas para uso consuntivo em 2017, o total captado foi de 66,0 trilhões de litros. A Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal e pesca foi a principal responsável (55,9%), seguida das atividades Captação, tratamento e distribuição de água (29,6%) e Indústrias de transformação e construção (9,1%).

Nessa análise, entre as grandes regiões, verifica-se a seguinte distribuição aproximada de retirada de água em 2017: Sudeste (35%), Sul (26%), Nordeste (23%), Centro-oeste (10%) e Norte (6%). Tal como ocorre no nível nacional, a atividade econômica com maior peso nesse tipo de retirada de água foi, em todas as grandes regiões, a Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal e pesca, com variações para cada região e predominância nas regiões onde a agricultura irrigada apresenta maior relevância.

A água utilizada pelas atividades econômicas e Famílias pode vir da retirada para atendimento próprio ou ser proveniente de um serviço de Captação, tratamento e distribuição de água, a exemplo das companhias que operam os serviços de abastecimento de água ou fornecem água usada nos perímetros públicos de irrigação (PPI). Considerando apenas o volume de água distribuído para atividades econômicas, os PPI tiveram participação de 54,6% em 2017. Nas atividades econômicas, a retirada de água para atendimento próprio predomina em relação a água proveniente da Captação, tratamento e distribuição de água. Já para as Famílias, 91,9% das águas são provenientes de outras atividades econômicas.

Com relação ao uso de água de distribuição, a região com a maior participação, em 2017, foi o Sudeste (45%), seguido do Nordeste (29%), Sul (14%), Centro-oeste (6%) e Norte (6%). Esse resultado é influenciado pelo fluxo de água advindo dos PPI, onde 75% estão concentrados na região Nordeste. Considerando-se apenas a distribuição de água tratada das companhias de abastecimento, o Sudeste passa a ser responsável por mais da metade do total de água de distribuição utilizado no país.

Volume de chuvas caiu 13% entre 2013 e 2016

As chuvas, o ingresso de água de rios com nascentes fora do Brasil e o retorno da água utilizada pelas atividades econômicas ao meio ambiente constituem acréscimos aos estoques. Por outro lado, a evaporação, a transpiração das plantas, a retirada de água pelas atividades econômicas e a saída de água dos rios para o mar ou para outros países constituem decréscimos nos estoques.

Em 2017, as adições no estoque total de água do Brasil foram de 27 quatrilhões de litros. A precipitação (chuva) foi o principal responsável (51,1%), seguida das entradas (36,4%) e o retorno ao meio ambiente por parte das atividades econômicas (12,5%). O volume de precipitação teve uma queda acumulada de 13% entre 2013 e 2016, voltando a crescer 6% de 2016 para 2017.

Ainda em 2017, a redução no estoque total de água no Brasil foi de 33 quatrilhões de litros. As saídas foram as principais responsáveis (61,9%), seguidas da evaporação/evapotranspiração (27,0%) e a captação de água por parte das atividades econômicas (11,1%).

Das grandes regiões, a que mais contribuiu na entrada de água no estoque nacional foi o Norte (98,8%), devido à participação da entrada de água de outros países a montante na Bacia Amazônica. A principal região responsável pela saída de água no estoque de água do país também foi o Norte (80,6%), seguido do Sul (11,1%) e Centro-oeste (5,4%).

Uso total da água pelas Famílias per capita por dia (litros/habitante/dia) - 2017

Uso de água das famílias per capita em 2017 foi de 116 litros/dia

Em 2017, no Brasil, o uso per capita de água pelas Famílias foi de 116 litros diários. O Sudeste registrou o maior uso per capita, com 143 litros, enquanto o menor uso foi registrado no Nordeste, 83 litros por habitante/dia. Considerando ainda as Famílias, a participação do volume de esgoto coletado pela rede de esgotamento sanitário em relação ao volume de água usado, o Sudeste foi região que apresenta o maior resultado em 2017, com 71%. Já na região Norte, apenas 14% da água utilizada pelas Famílias retorna ao meio ambiente através da rede de coleta.

Valor da produção de água e esgoto foi de R$ 56,5 bilhões em 2017

Em 2017, a atividade Água e esgoto correspondeu a 0,6% do Valor Adicionado Bruto (VAB) corrente do total da economia. O valor da produção de água de distribuição e serviços de esgoto foi R$ 56,5 bilhões em 2017, sendo a água de distribuição responsável por 65,9% desse total. Pelo lado da demanda, ou seja, dos gastos, em 2017, as Famílias foram as maiores responsáveis pelo uso de água de distribuição (61,5%) e serviços de esgoto (62,1%). Nas regiões Sul, Centro-Oeste e Nordeste, a atividade Água e esgoto correspondeu a cerca de 0,6% do VAB corrente. Na região Norte e Sudeste esse percentual foi 0,3% e 0,7%, respectivamente.

Quanto ao custo dos serviços de distribuição de água e serviços de esgoto, o Centro-oeste apresentou os maiores valores em 2017, com R$ 4,71 para cada 1.000 litros. Já as regiões com os menores valores foram o Norte e o Nordeste.

No Nordeste a demanda de água advinda da atividade Água e Esgoto para irrigação foi maior do que a das famílias

No caso do volume de água advindo da atividade Água e Esgoto, as Famílias foram as principais demandantes em todas as grandes regiões em comparação às atividades econômicas, com exceção da região Nordeste. Nesta região a demanda de água para fins de irrigação, fornecida pela atividade Água e esgoto superou a demanda por água das Famílias em cerca de 30% em 2017, isso ocorreu principalmente devido ao volume de água originário dos PPI, demandado pela atividade Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal e pesca.

Contas Econômicas Ambientais. Economia brasileira consumiu 6,3 litros de água para cada R$ 1 gerado em 2017. Atividades relacionadas à agropecuária geraram R$ 1 para cada 1.061 litros de água consumidos

Para cada R$ 1 de valor adicionado bruto gerado pela economia brasileira em 2017, foram consumidos, aproximadamente, 6,3 litros de água. A atividade que exigia maior volume de água era a Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal, pesca e aquicultura, com 1.061 litros para cada R$ 1 gerado. Entre as grandes regiões, o Centro-Oeste apresentou a maior intensidade de consumo desse recurso natural, com 1.511,9 litros/R$ 1. Os números fazem parte do estudo Contas Econômicas Ambientais da Água: Brasil 2013-2017 (CEAA), divulgado hoje (7) pelo IBGE em parceria com a Agência Nacional de Águas (ANA).

O consumo total de água no país no ano, que corresponde à água utilizada menos a que retorna para o meio ambiente, foi de 329,8 trilhões de litros. Os principais responsáveis pelo consumo desse recurso natural foram a Agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal, pesca e aquicultura (97,4%), que tem como destaque a agricultura de sequeiro (não irrigada); Indústria de transformação e construção (1,0%) e Água e esgoto (0,8%).

Segundo o estudo, no ano a atividade Água e esgoto correspondeu a 0,6% do valor adicionado bruto corrente do total da economia. O valor da produção de água de distribuição e serviços de esgoto foi R$ 56,5 bilhões, sendo a água de distribuição responsável por 65,9% desse total. Pelo lado da demanda, ou seja, dos gastos, em 2017, as Famílias foram as maiores responsáveis pelo uso de água de distribuição (61,5%) e serviços de esgoto (62,1%).

Uso de água das famílias per capita em 2017 foi de 116 litros/dia

Em 2017, o uso per capita de água pelas Famílias foi de 116 litros diários. O Sudeste registrou o maior uso per capita, com 143 litros, enquanto o menor uso foi registrado no Nordeste, 83 litros por habitante/dia.

Quanto à participação do volume de esgoto coletado pela rede de esgotamento sanitário em relação ao volume de água usado, o Sudeste foi a região que apresenta o maior resultado em 2017, com 71%. Já na região Norte, apenas 14% da água utilizada pelas Famílias retorna ao meio ambiente através da rede de coleta.

"Pela primeira vez, apresentamos dados regionalizados, o que ajuda a compreender melhor as particularidades de cada região do país", explica o analista da Coordenação de Contas Nacionais do IBGE, Michel Lapip. A primeira publicação da CEEA, com dados de 2013 a 2015, foi revisada, atualizada e ampliada dentro desse novo estudo. "Mudanças metodológicas ajudaram a aprofundar o grau de detalhamento", acrescenta o pesquisador.

De forma inédita, o levantamento fez cálculos distintos para a agricultura irrigada e o plantio de sequeiro. Enquanto a primeira se aproveita de rios e lagos, este último depende exclusivamente das águas da chuva e do solo, ocupando mais de 90% da área agrícola do País. Segundo o estudo, para cada R$ 1 gerado pela atividade econômica que engloba agricultura, pecuária, produção florestal, pesca e aquicultura, foram consumidos 1.061 litros de água. Se descontarmos o volume de água do solo utilizado pela agricultura de sequeiro, o indicador passa a ser de 95,5 litros/R$ 1 em 2017. Os números reforçam o peso da atividade agrária como o setor econômico que mais se utiliza da água para produzir riqueza.

No Nordeste, a agropecuária de irrigação consome 151,4 litros de água para cada R$ 1 que a atividade gera - a mais alta taxa em termos regionais. "O clima semiárido e as características fisiológicas dos principais cultivos da região elevam este valor", atesta Lapip. Devido ao volume de água originário dos perímetros públicos de irrigação (PPI), a demanda de água para fins de irrigação superou a demanda das próprias famílias nordestinas em 30%. A situação é diferente em todas as outras grandes regiões, onde as famílias superaram as atividades econômicas em volume de água demandada.

Já a demanda hídrica na geração de renda nas indústrias extrativas foi de 3,4 litros por real, o mesmo patamar das indústrias de transformação e construção.

Contas Econômicas Ambientais da Água

Em março de 2018, o IBGE, a ANA e o Ministério do Meio Ambiente lançaram as Contas Ambientais da Água: Brasil - 2013-2015. A partir daquela primeira publicação, foi possível entender com maior clareza a relação entre os recursos hídricos e o valor agregado de cada atividade econômica e como a água desempenha um papel-chave no desenvolvimento econômico do país.

A iniciativa, que agora chega à segunda edição, conta com apoio técnico da Agência Internacional de Cooperação Alemã para o Desenvolvimento Sustentável (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit - GIZ). O objetivo é produzir e disseminar sistematicamente para a sociedade informações referentes ao balanço entre a disponibilidade quantitativa e qualitativa de água, além da demanda hídrica dos diversos setores da economia brasileira, incluindo as famílias.

DOCUMENTO: https://agenciadenoticias.ibge.gov.br/agencia-sala-de-imprensa/2013-agencia-de-noticias/releases/27607-em-2017-o-brasil-consumia-6-3-litros-d-agua-para-cada-r-1-gerado-pela-economia

_______________

LGCJ.: