Twenty Years of Disasters and the Rain Keeps Falling

Having lived and reported in Latin America for 20 years, I’ve done my fair share of disaster reporting. When I worked in Mexico and Haiti it felt like every week I was counting bodies, either from explosions in oil pipes or fireworks factories, or floods, or earthquakes and hurricanes.

I remember boarding an almost empty plane to Cancun to try and get in the way of Hurricane Mitch. When we got there everyone else was thronging the airport to get out – and I was bummed out when the hurricane took a left turn at the last minute and hit Honduras instead.

I once went to the Guatemalan border to cover floods there and couldn’t find a hotel room because the small town was filled with army officers. My memory of that day was speaking with a young lad who walked miles from his home town with a letter asking for help.

And one of my first big stories as a correspondent was just a few weeks after I started at UPI and I spent the night on the office couch doing regular updates to the death toll after an oil duct exploded in Guadalajara.

It would be insensitive to describe them as good times, but they were certainly memorable and they helped me become the reporter I am today.

Although none of what I did was as dramatic as this amazing rescue video shot yesterday near Rio:

I write this because I’ve just spent the last 36 hours writing about the terrible floods in Brazil.  I’ve done similar stories it seems almost every year from here and this time the questions I wanted to ask were clear: Why does this keep happening and why do authorities never work on prevention?

The clearest answer was from the Gil Castello Branco, who does great work over at Contas Abertas, an NGO that monitors government spending. He told me:

“When these disasters occur we know what will happen, the politicians will survey the disaster area from a helicopter, then touch down and declare solidarity with the families and then announce a big rescue package so that he looks like the savior. What they should be doing is going there when the sun shines to stand on the edge of a hill and announce that people living there will be removed from the high risk area. But no one wants to do that.”

“It is a historic problem, Brazil always spends money after the fact rather than in prevention,” he added. “We turn that old saying on its head. We aren’t safe, we are sorry.”

There’s more answers here in the Christian Science Monitor and here in Time magazine.

Lula Leaves Office, But Not The Spotlight

With less than two weeks to go before Lula leaves office, the season of retrospectives is upon us. Many newspapers and magazines have issued special supplements looking back over Lula’s fascinating, largely successful and always eventful eight years in power.

One of the most pertinent questions, though, concerns not Lula’s past but his future. Many people wonder whether Lula, a former union leader who has know nothing other than politics for the best part of three decades, will be able to cope with life outside the spotlight. (See my Christian Science Monitor piece on that speculation here.)

Lula is the consummate politician and loves being centre stage. He loves to talk and he loves the attention. Some believe he hand-picked a relatively unknown civil servant to succeed him in order to make it easier for him to run again in four years time.

Those rumours took on a new lease of life this week after Lula told a local TV channel he did not rule out another presidential bid in 2014.

“I can’t say no because I’m still alive,” Lula told Rede TV. “I’m honorary president of a party, I’m a born politician, I built extraordinary political relationships.”

The timing undermines Dilma Rousseff, who has not commented on the interview (or much else for that matter).

But should we really give the talk any credence? Indeed, should we take anything Lula says seriously? A consumate politician, Lula is known for preaching to the choir. As I say in this Financial Times piece today:

Mr Lula da Silva is charming and folksy and famous for saying one thing one day and something completely different the next, often depending on the audience in front of him.

Just last month he called speculation he might run again “small-minded” and said Brazilians should be discussing 2011 and not 2014.

That completely contradicts what he told Rede TV. So which Lula to believe?

Another example of the contradictions surround Lula’s immediate future. He has hinted variously that he will work for Africa, take on a role at an international organization, focus on eradicating world poverty, and put his feet up and relax. Of course, he can do all of those things. But he has told different audiences different things.

A more worrying example of his mixed messages are in his future dealings with Rousseff. He offered her advice and then vowed not to interfere in her administration. Then he said he will help her if she needs him.

And all this in spite of the fact that he has spent the best part of eight years telling his predecessor that ex-presidents should be seen and not heard.

Time will tell where Lula goes and what he does. But I can’t see him bowing out quietly. There have been many acts in Lula’s storybook life. I think (and hope) there are more to come.

It’s Dilma! (Surprise, Surprise)

Dilma is the new president.

Here’s my piece from Time on her election and what her government might be like.

And here’s another one of my offerings with a bit more analysis on the Christian Science Monitor website.

The AP have a good piece here from the always reliable Bradley Brooks and the NYT’s offering is here.

 

 

Marina Suprises But She’s No King (or Queen) Maker

I wrote two stories today recapping and analysing the weekend election results.

One piece appeared in Time magazine, which is basically a short analysis of what we can expect in the second round. And this one in the Christian Science Monitor is a straighter report of the weekend’s winners and losers.

The big surprise of course was the performance of Green Party candidate Marina Silva.

I spoke to a number of people outside a polling station in Brasiliandia, one of Sao Paulo’s gritty North Side neighbourhoods. I was shocked at how many people said they were voting for Marina. Of the dozen or so people I interviewed more than half said they were voting for her.

When you get that sort of response you never know if it is representative of the bigger picture. There could be any number of reasons one polling station or area or city supports a particular candidate and until that point there was no reason to believe the polls that gave Marina around 14 percent of the vote were substantially incorrect. Even though a lot of people said they supported her, it was hard for me to believe that she was really going to make an impact.

It was only when the results came in and she got 19 percent that I realized what I had seen was no fluke.

Marina will be a key player over the next few weeks, and probably over the next few years, too. But I think a lot of people are overestimating her influence in the second round ballot.

Her voters won’t all go to Serra and Dilma only needs 3 percent to secure victory. Dilma should still win quite comfortably, especially given that Lula will be out there shilling for her at every turn.

As analyst Christopher Garman told me about Dilma:

“All she has to do is stick to the message. Brazilian voters are optimistic about the future, they are satisfied with the status quo so her message has to be, You either stay the course of go back to the Cardoso years.”

Dilma’s Momentum Slows but She’ll Still Win

The Brazilian election is just three days away and Dilma Rousseff’s lead is slipping.

The Workers’ Party candidate had as much as 51 percent of the vote in several polls but has slipped in some to 46 percent, as I point out in this short piece for the Christian Science Monitor World blog.

But what was most interesting to me was to see this note I got today from Alberto Almeida of the Analise Institute in São Paulo. Almeida said that many illiterate voters make a mistake and end up spoiling their electronic votes and so the estimates regularly overestimate the final tallies.

The presidential selection is the last of the six voters have to make (after governor, two senators, federal and state deputies), further complicating matters.

Lula’s vote was estimated at 3 points more than what he eventually got in winning in 2002 and 4 points more than in 2006, Almeida pointed out.

“The election will go to a second round,” he said.

It won’t make much of a difference in the grand scheme of things. Dilma will still win comfortably.

But it’s good news for democracy. And for campaign staff, pundits and journalists like me, who get four more weeks of work.

No Pass Mark for Brazil in University Rankings

The latest list of university rankings came out and Latin American universities were poorly placed as usual.

The validity of these lists and the criteria used to compile them are always controversial, as Francisco Marmolejo points out in this post on the Chronicle of Higher Education site.

But love them or hate them lists are always good for journalists, and for anyone who likes a good debate.

I wrote this piece for the Christian Science Monitor on Brazil, which had more universities placed than any other Latin American nation. Brazil did not do too well. It has a lot of work ahead.

The good news is that it understands what needs to be done and is starting to take steps to remedy the situation.

Petrobras No Publicity is Bad Publicity

A story is written with the best information available at the time. Quite often that information is quickly superseded. Something new happens, or something new is said, or more (or different) information is revealed. The journalist can end up looking lax at best and ridiculous at worst.

I say this after reading two stories in O Globo over the last two days. In one, here in Portuguese, Petrobras is accused of covering up the fact pipes on its P-33 platform are horribly corroded. The other reports of a fire on the P-35 platform caused by a leak.

(Petrobras said today it was stopping work on P-35 in October to perform maintenance. The maintenance work was supposed to have happened last month but was postponed.)

Writing about Petrobras is one of the most frustrating tasks I do as a correspondent. The company gives nothing away, even when it is in its best interests. It’s a stupid and self-defeating policy.

The best example came shortly after the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico when I called Petrobras to get an update on their safety procedures. They refused to talk.

Nine years ago I wrote a piece for Latin Trade about how three oil disasters had forced the company into reviewing and overhauling its safety procedures. The company vowed to invest $1 billion on training and equipment to prevent more such disasters. And it seemed to work; Petrobras has a safety record comparable with an of its rivals.

I wanted to write about those advances but Petrobras refused to discuss the issue. The flaks blew me off, refusing to give me any information and not returning several phone calls. They were arrogant and offhand, as usual.

I ended up publishing this piece for the Christian Science Monitor, which was written by my colleague Sara Miller Llana. All the information in it was correct. But I knew there was more. O Globo today confirmed those suspicions.

P-P-Pick Up a Penguin. A Dead One. In Brazil.

If someone told me 10 years ago that I would write several stories about the penguins who make their way to Brazil’s beaches every year, I’d have said they were mad. Penguins and Brazil go together like football players and class or telecoms companies and low rates.

But here goes another from today’s Christian Science Monitor.

Some 500 Magellanic penguins (like the one pictured) turned up dead on a beach in southern Brazil this week, probably from hunger and exhaustion after they swam north from Patagonia in search of food. They didn’t find the sardines and squid they were looking for and then got caught up in rough seas and high winds that tired them out.

The first time I wrote a piece about penguins appearing on Brazilian beaches was in 2000, when I wrote this Monitor piece. It was a bit of a novelty at the time and the story got huge play.

My pal from NPR went with me to Saquarema on the Rio coast and he said he had never got such positive feedback on any story in all his life. National Geographic for Kids even published a photo I took of a penguin in someone’s front yard, allowing me to boast I am a National Geographic photographer.

On that trip I saw wayward penguins adopted as pets, waddling around town on a leash. I spoke to people who put penguins in fridges to keep them cool (don’t, the shock can kill them). And I even heard of people taking penguins surfing with them on their boards.

So penguins are big news in the unlikeliest of places. And everything suggests they will continue to be. In this weird world of global warming and global colding, I’m sure I’ll be writing more about Brazil’s penguins, dead and alive, in the years to come.

Brazil to Continue March to Final

Here’s another blog from the Monitor about tomorrow’s Brazil-Holland match.

Tomorrow’s game pits against each other two of the most technically gifted sides in the world.

(Here’s a pic of the Brazil team leaving their hotel in Johannesburg for the last time.)

I fancy the Argentina-Germany game will be much better, though.  After all, those two teams are the two highest scoring in the tournament so far. (I’ll blog on that tomorrow.)

In the meantime, Brazil are the favourites and the Monitor asked me to say why. Here are my reasons.

Blogging for Scotland (and Brazil and Argentina)

I’ve been a bit lax with posting the last week or so. The World Cup has taken up most of my time.

I’ve been writing set up pieces and match reports on the Brazil and Argentina games for the Christian Science Monitor, which has a surprisingly good blog here.

Here’s my piece from today on Brazil’s impressive 3-0 win over Chile.

And here’s my piece on Brazil’s opening group and the nonsense of calling it the Group of Death.

I’ll post more as they happen.