The decision was announced by the president of the collegiate body, Senator Davi Alcolumbre (União-AP), at the meeting on Wednesday 12th, after senators expressed their disagreement on the matter.

The bill was even tabled at the meeting and the rapporteur, Senator Irajá (PSD-TO), presented a supplementary vote, accepting five drafting amendments. While some senators expressed doubts about the new opinion and asked for more time to study the changes, other members of the CCJ, who at the beginning of the meeting had presented a request to postpone the analysis, began to defend the vote on the matter this Wednesday.

Faced with the impasse, Alcolumbre said he didn't want to address any ideological issues and decided to put the matter up for consideration next week, after the hearings, with a commitment not to postpone the discussion any longer. 

“So I'm going to decide, everything is withdrawn, all three - postponement and request - are withdrawn and this presidency is going to schedule next Wednesday, the week of the concentrated effort. [...] And then we'll see if the 27 will be here to vote, whether they'll be full members or substitutes; if the 81 will be there in plenary to vote on the release of the authorities and we'll see how each one will vote”, he said.

Bill 2.234/2022, from the Chamber of Deputies, was presented in that House in 1991. In the Senate, it has been in progress since 2022, with no consensus for a vote. The text allows casinos to be set up in tourist centres or integrated leisure complexes, such as high-end hotels, restaurants, bars and venues for meetings and cultural events.

Opponents

In the opinion of the senators opposed to the proposal, allowing gambling will not bring any economic advantage to the country and will promote negative consequences, such as encouraging the commission of crimes like money laundering and tax evasion.

"The World Health Organisation itself considers ludopathy [gambling addiction] to be an increasingly serious disease, which has devastated jobs, because people start to lose productivity; it has devastated the family…This generates crime" said Senator Eduardo Girão (Novo-CE).

In the opinion of these senators, Brazil is not prepared for this authorisation, either because of the lack of control bodies to monitor casinos and bingos, or because of the increase in crime and the emergence of new social problems. 

“We don't want the approval of gambling in our country, we don't want the possibility of money laundering for drug trafficking, we don't want the possibility of tax evasion, we don't want the possibility of Brazilian society sinking even deeper into debt problems”, declared Senator Carlos Viana (Podemos-MG). 

Senator Sérgio Moro (União-PR) noted that the issue raises many questions. One of them is the issue of publicity and lack of transparency. He cited the ostentatious publicising of online sports games, the famous bets, as a negative example.

“ I have very serious concerns about advertising. It seems to me that in relation to, for example, these bets that have been approved, there is abusive advertising, I only see it on TV, in commercial breaks. And of course every business has the right to advertise, but we have to be careful that this doesn't encourage an exaggerated addiction in this area. I'd even like to see if this bill makes any provision for this.”

Senators Oriovisto Guimarães (Podemos-PR), Damares Alves (Republicanos-DF), Zequinha Marinho (Podemos-PA), Marcio Bittar (União-AC), Esperidião Amin (PP-SC), Marcos Rogério (PL-RO) and Jorge Seif (PL-SC) also spoke against the bill's approval. 

New amendments

Senator Irajá praised the approach presented by the CCJ president and said that 38 amendments had been submitted so far. He considered the new deadline fundamental for analysing the suggested changes and seeking to resolve the doubts of the committee members.

"Now, in the morning, we have received five more amendments, I'm not going to go into the merits of whether they are feasible or not, but they require time so that we can make a calm and balanced assessment and, being prudent, being feasible, we can admit them or not. So your decision to postpone the discussion is not just a matter of common sense, President Davi, [...] but also of the need for the rapporteur to be able to assess these new amendments that have been tabled," he said.

Even though they didn't state their positions, whether in favour or against, Senators Eduardo Braga (MDB-AM) and Rogério Carvalho (PT-SE) defended more time to analyse the adjustments to the text.

“Just to clarify that my position here is not an anticipation of a vote. Some senators have tried to put it in my mouth or in my statement that my vote will be in favour or against this bill. What I asked for was, due to the changes presented in the report, a postponement so that we can have absolute conviction regarding the report presented, to vote against or in favour”, clarified Eduardo Braga.

Source: Agência Senado