In processes of severe economic adjustments like the one we are going through, it is necessary that an attitude of commitment and solidarity from all sectors of society prevail.
It is the way to mitigate the temporary damage they cause.
In a country with populist governments, which overwhelmed it for decades, corporations flourish in collusion with the State and benefit in the short term to the detriment of the people.
The profound changes, and perhaps untidy due to the urgency, that the current administration is facing, have made it clear that these corporate interests are not imbued with the commitment that society demands to match, as far as possible, the great effort that it must make.
They refuse to give up the advantages and benefits to which a prebendary, corrupt and crony capitalism system of government has accustomed them.
They warn that the State, which has supported them, is now letting go of their hand and beginning to prioritize the general well-being of citizens to the detriment of its corporate interests.
Then appears the rejection of corporations - politicians, unions, artists, businesswomen, professional associations, social groups, etc. - to the measures that go to the heart of the privileges acquired in complicity with almost all the governments of the last 80 years.
The energy sector is no stranger to this corporate behavior, where permanent state intervention generated a status quo that has benefited several companies that refuse to abandon it.
It is a comfort niche that works in a minimalist business environment for the country, in relation to the international energy resources it has, but very profitable and comfortable for this “sub-corporation” that always needed seasoned “experts in regulated markets” and that the current government wants to eliminate.
During Kirchnerism, not to go back to the last century, businessmen and particularly those in the energy sector had no choice but to accept the rules of the game and take advantage of the malpractice, corruption and incapacity of state officials who parasitically mediated in the decisions.
A case that illustrates this modus operandi very well is the NEUBA III gas pipeline, inappropriately renamed Néstor Kirchner and widely presented as a success of the previous government's management, when in reality it was a work that ended up being paid by the State, all of us, double the original budget and which remains unfinished.
Let us remember that the Macri government was going to put it out to tender so that it could be built, operated and financed by the oil sector, which was prevented from evacuating its production due to lack of gas pipelines.
But the fourth Kirchnerist government arrives and decides that the State will do it via the intermediary ENARSA, as always, in charge of La Cámpora.
For the participating companies, the work was a great deal.
In particular, for the one that was the beneficiary of contracts for the construction and provision of the pipes, engineering and laying of the gas pipeline, so that it could then sell more gas, much of which, at a price higher than the market until 2028 in virtue of the “acquired right” with the Gas Plan.
But for the State, which agreed to pay double the original budget for an authorization only in the last month of winter and with only a quarter of the design capacity, it was a loss, which was not greater because the price of the gas that had to be imported Due to the delay, it fell to half of what ENARSA had planned.
Now, the same companies that participated as State contractors will repeat that successful business with the reversal of the gas pipeline that brought gas from Bolivia.
The State will hire them again due to urgency, this time, given the probability that the Argentine NOA will run out of gas this winter.
Emergency that will justify higher costs, that the State continues to provide the money and that there is no real competition through tenders for local companies and companies from around the world.
Furthermore, there is a high probability that the work will not be enabled this winter.
There were alternatives that the new administration should have analyzed and that must be taken into account to supply the NOA this winter, since as I said, the work will not be ready.
The case presented illustrates the short-term vision, the lack of commitment to the country and the lack of interest in the potential of our resources that will never be valued without the changes that the current government wants to make.
Nor with ENARSA, which was functional to the political corporation for 20 years, acting as a counterpart to that of the energy sector business community.
ENARSA was created in 2004 by Néstor Kirchner to mediate in energy activity with the aim of expropriating, legally or illegally, part of the sector's income in line with the myriad of regulations added since then and that the Executive mistakenly wants to privatize, when what corresponds is to liquidate it.