What Lídia spoke about.

The honourable Member, being an institutionalist, has little confidence in the institutions and therefore little confidence in the ability of the authorities to do their job, namely the police, who have responsibilities in ensuring that the law is complied with. This is the first answer I have to give you. The second is that gambling addiction must be combated, and so I talked about prevention. It is essential that there is a pact in society to combat addiction and addictive behaviors that so many lives often sacrifice and that endanger many families. In particular, protect the younger generations, because they are often also more prone to these dangers that are often present in the digital space.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the possibility of having more money for the European Union budget from the gambling sector deserves to be studied with seriousness, pragmatism and a sense of responsibility. The growth of this sector is an unavoidable reality, but it is also unavoidable that many operators act beyond national borders and exploit regulatory differences and weaknesses in control and taxes. Every year we lose around EUR 20 billion in revenue to the Union budget. So yes, it makes sense to assess whether this activity can finance the Union budget, but we should be clear: It is not enough to look for new recipes. To move forward, we need a demanding regulatory framework, with better supervision and more cooperation between countries. And just as or more important is to ensure more protection for players, because gambling addicts, generates addictive behaviors, can destroy financial stability, family relationships and jeopardize mental health. I don't want a European Union addicted to gambling revenue, so if this is to be a path, we need to look carefully at gambling advertising, whether in the traditional media, as in the digital space, going through the influencers. Because if there is a recipe, there must be transparency and accountability. If there is regulation, there must be prevention. And if there is a European decision, it has to protect people first and only then the Union budget.

Madam President, this debate is about urgency: 30 years of unfulfilled single market. We are tired – I am tired – of citing Draghi’s Letta reports, and the main conclusion is that the biggest reform Europe has to do does not require 1 euro of debt; It requires political courage to break down the internal borders that we have created ourselves and, in particular, the Council, which, unfortunately, is not in this debate. Every barrier we keep is a job we lose. Every duplicate regulation is an SME that gives up exporting and every year of hesitation is a startup European scale outside Europe. Our companies, in particular small and medium-sized enterprises, do not ask for subsidies – they ask for clear, stable and equal rules for all, they ask for predictability, they ask for Europe to finally be a market that lives up to its ambition. That is why we must move forward on three fronts: simplifying legislation with less red tape and more focus on competitiveness, completing the Savings and Investments Union so that European money finances European businesses, and seriously integrating the internal market for services, energy and digital. This is how we ensure security for our companies. This is how we create quality jobs. This is how we restore confidence to Europeans. It's time for diagnostics. This is the time of decisions, but above all the time of action.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I believe that this debate shows that financial literacy is no longer a peripheral issue. First of all, I would like to thank all the shadow rapporteurs, all my fellow Members who have been actively involved in the construction of this text and these proposals, and also to congratulate the Commission on the alignment that exists in the direction of these proposals. When we talk about financial literacy – as I said and would like to emphasise again – we are talking about a central issue of freedom, protection and social justice. This report is the result of a set of balances. We do not want paternalism on the one hand, we do not want to diminish individual responsibility, we do not want to replace the investor protection framework. What this report does is to acknowledge an obvious reality: in a more complex and digital financial world, citizens need more tools to decide better, and more protection against those who seek to deceive them. That is why we have worked on three priorities. First, training, training, lifelong learning, then protection and simplification. If we want more Europeans to save and invest with confidence, we must make information clearer and more comparable and useful for those who make decisions on a day-to-day basis. But we also wanted to bring here the theme of accountability of those who act in the digital environment. It is not a question of censoring content creators, but of distinguishing who informs from who deceives, of demanding transparency in conflicts of interest and of asking platforms to be more accountable for fraud, manipulation and dissemination of misleading content. I repeat: We don't want to tell people what to do with their money, we want them to be able to decide better, with more security, less vulnerability and more confidence. I thank everyone once again, but it is clear at the end of this discussion that, unfortunately, we have a less virtuous alignment, that of the far left and the far right, even on matters of broad consensus, as we have witnessed throughout this process.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, financial literacy is not a luxury for those who earn more, nor a subject reserved for specialists in the field, it is a condition of freedom for each of us. When someone does not understand the cost of a credit, the operation of the loan, the payroll, the risk of the investment or the difference between serious information and marketing Undercover, makes decisions less secure, is more vulnerable to over‑indebtedness and is more exposed to fraud and disinformation. In the European Union, only one in five citizens has a high level of financial literacy. This is not a statistical detail, it is a problem of inclusion, protection and even competitiveness. This report aims to address this deficit and our message is simple: more financial literacy means more freedom for people to decide about their future. We don't want to tell people what to do with their money. We want to make sure they can decide better, more safely and with more confidence. First of all, we need to treat financial literacy as a basic competence, learned from an early age and strengthened throughout life. This means integrating the subject into school curricula, strengthening teacher training, promoting workplace programmes and creating responses adapted to life's defining moments, such as the first salary, the purchase of a house or the preparation of retirement, with special attention to the most vulnerable groups. It also means measuring results seriously, through targets, regular surveys and evaluation. What we cannot measure, we cannot improve. Without metrics, we have good intentions. With metrics, we have consistent public policy. Secondly, if we want to build the Savings and Investments Union, it is not enough to look at the supply side. We need citizens who can compare costs, perceive risk and return, understand the impact of inflation and choose with knowledge. Therefore, we propose simple and useful tools, a permanent and multilingual European campaign, a repository of good practices, clear commission and risk comparators and greater regulatory consistency, simplifying information without reducing investor protection. Thirdly, we need to understand the new digital ecosystem. For many of us, access to financial information is no longer at the bank counter. It's social media. And this creates opportunities, but also very serious risks: covert advertising, conflicts of interest, unskilled advice or even fraud. Our approach is balanced. It's not about censoring content creators, it's about distinguishing who informs from who deceives. And that is why we are proposing more transparency in trade partnerships, a European code of conduct, a voluntary label for good practice, training for finfluencers, clear risk warnings and increased responsibility of digital platforms. Ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, this is a report on money, yes, but, above all, it is a report on freedom and security in everyday decisions. We want citizens, more prepared people, not conditioned citizens. We want a Europe that educates better, protects more and takes responsibility seriously, because more financial literacy means more freedom to decide, and that is the freedom that this report aims to strengthen.

Mr President, this week, Europeans, including millions of Portuguese, are paying another twenty cents per litre of diesel. Twenty cents that do not depend on us, that do not result from the choices of Europeans, but rather from decisions taken thousands of kilometres away, at tables where Europe does not participate in the discussion. And this is where the real problem lies: We remain vulnerable, exposed to fossil fuels that condition our competitiveness. In a world marked by conflict and uncertainty, this dependence weakens‑nos, but above all it limits our freedom and undermines citizens’ trust in the Union’s ability to protect our values and ensure prosperity. If increasingly frequent and devastating extreme climate events are not enough reason to accelerate the clean transition, then let our autonomy speak louder. But ensuring affordable energy is not just an economic issue, it is a matter of welfare, justice and the future. We need to lower energy costs for industry, for households, for business. We need to move confidently towards an economic model that leaves behind the old carbon-emitting patterns. And above all, we need to decide our fate. This means a public sector that does not brake but accelerates; which does not complicate, but makes possible; It acts as an engine for the change we want to see. Accelerating the expansion of clean energy is not ideology, it is not Wokism, as we so often hear from the extreme ‑ right. Yes, ‑ is a necessity: completing the internal energy market with functioning interconnectors, using energy more intelligently and permanently cutting dependence on imported fossil fuels. And now is the time for us, together, with courage and vision, to ensure that Europe continues to own its future and to fight for wages and a thriving economy that delivers for new generations.

I thank the honourable Member for the question, but I have just explained in my speech what we have to do. We have to decide, but that is only possible if there are political parties committed to the European project and to European prosperity. And, sincerely and regrettably, I do not think that your political group is committed to finding solutions in order to have a more competitive, less bureaucratic Europe; On the contrary, they want to destroy Europe.

Madam President, the time for reports has passed. Europe needs to decide once and for all whether to simplify, invest, scale or lag behind. We do not lose competitiveness due to lack of talent; we lose by context costs, bureaucracy, fragmentation, costly energy. But European companies, especially SMEs, startup and scaleupThey've had enough of diagnostics. They need a simplification shock: fewer redundant obligations, less paperwork, fewer administrative mazes. It's not unregulating, it's betting on digital solutions by default. Fewer laws, but better rules. We need a functioning single market. Businesses need this single market: genuine mutual recognition procedures, harmonised and predictable rules and the principle report once only. A company cannot be required to prove 27 times in order to grow 27 times and needs capital to scale. The Savings and Investments Union must be a place where capital meets knowledge, where investment meets innovation, where finance meets ideas. And so let us, here, decide and decide quickly so that more competitiveness is not an abstract debate, but an accomplished goal.

Madam President, Europe has a single market, but European companies deal with 27 different national laws. This scenario has time, money and opportunity costs. This is why the 28th regime is so necessary. First, because it reduces legal and administrative fragmentation. A harmonised European scheme of the right size gives businesses, especially start-ups, at scale-ups and small and medium-sized enterprises, a clear and predictable framework for growing and operating across borders. Less uncertainty is more investment, more scale and more competitiveness. Second, because it simplifies business life. We consume too much resources in red tape and redundant processes. A simpler, highly digital regime based on the ‘report once only’ principle frees up time and capital for what really matters: Innovate, invest and create jobs. The 28th regime does not replace national reforms, it complements them. It is not an end in itself, it is an instrument at the service of the European economy. If we want fewer reports and more results, this is a step that we cannot postpone.

Mr President, dear colleagues, dear Commissioner, tomorrow's vote is not just another step in Europe's climate journey. It is the first real test of our commitment to the vision outlined in the Draghi report: a competitive, resilient and climate‑neutral Europe. The 2040 target we set today must be more than a number. It must be a roadmap, one that aligns ambition with economic reality, that drives innovation rather than deindustrialisation, and that ensures no region or citizen is left behind. Mario Draghi reminded us that Europe's competitiveness and climate leadership are not opposing goals. They are two sides of the same coin. If we want to remain a global player, we must invest in clean technologies, scale up green industries and create the right conditions for private investment in Europe, not elsewhere. Our proposal confirms a 90 % net emissions reduction by 2040. It does through a framework that balances ambition with fairness: 85 % domestic reduction, limited use of high‑quality international credits and flexibility for Member States. We also introduced a reinforced review clause because credible policy is adaptable policy. It must respond to scientific progress, energy prices and industrial realities. The Draghi report calls for a new European competitiveness deal. This climate target is part of that deal. It shows that we can lead the green transition without sacrificing growth, that we can protect our planet while strengthening our economy. So, let us be clear: Europe's climate ambition is not about doing more alone, but doing better together. It is about leadership through example, not isolation. So with this vote, we turn the ambition into action. We honour the spirit of this Draghi report and we send a message to the world that Europe will remain the place where economic opportunity meets climate responsibility.

Madam President, on the environment, Roger Scruton said that the natural world now depends on our efforts to conserve it. When we seek consolation in nature, we are looking into a mirror that we have created for that purpose. COP30 is not just another conference, it is a decisive moment, one of those rare moments when humanity looks in the mirror and decides who it wants to be. It is a meeting of wills that rise up in the face of skepticism, immobilism, and that believe — as a Portuguese poet, Fernando Pessoa, put it — that ‘God wants, man dreams, work is born’. Today's resolution is living proof that Europe continues to lead. It leads with ambition, with responsibility and with the courage of those who know that the future is not expected, it is built. Taking care of the environment is not just saving the planet, it is redefining our collective purpose. It is proving that we can grow and decarbonise at the same time, that we can innovate by putting knowledge at the service of people, that we can live in communion with nature, respecting ecosystems, protecting communities, with people at the heart of policies. That is why the resolution we are bringing to COP30 proposes very concrete measures. We want to continue to strengthen the European Union's leadership and secure fair climate finance, and to adopt the 2035 climate commitment now without delay. We want to continue to accelerate the end of fossil fuels and eliminate perverse subsidies by promoting clean and competitive markets. We want to show that it is indeed possible to decarbonise and grow. Because this is already happening. My country, Portugal, is living proof that with records of renewable energy and the end of coal, ambition and action can go hand in hand. COP30 is a test of our determination, it is a test of our ability to combine science and politics, ambition, courage and pragmatism. This is our mission, this is our moment, and together we can give birth to the work.

Madam President, the Draghi report, which is quoted here on a yes-day, needs fewer references and more consequences. We cannot applaud the proposals and then oppose the decisions that make them happen. We are tired of repeating the diagnosis. I myself, in this Parliament for the last six years, have often been repeating what remains to be done for Europe and for the new generations. We are not lacking in savings in Europe; what is lacking is to turn these savings into productive investment, into companies that grow, innovate and create jobs. There are no magic formulas, but there is something we can do, and it has already been said here several times by several colleagues. First, complete the Capital Markets Union. Fragmentation of our markets costs us competitiveness, productivity and investment. Secondly, to free businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises, from the bureaucracy that stifles them. It is not only about simplifying for those who are already in the market – it is also about making life easier for those who want to enter that market to innovate, to undertake. Third, mobilising public investment that complements private investment. And we all know the priorities: energy, clean technologies, defence, research and development. The world in which the Draghi Report was written is not the world in which it has to be applied. Our mission is to face this unpredictable international context, with the awareness that the reforms we repeated a year ago are not being carried out on their own – they are the political will that the Commission has to assume and that we here have to follow. With ambition.

Madam President, dear colleagues, Europe was borne out of the courage to turn conflict into cooperation, to build peace through industry and energy. Today, we need that courage once again. The European Climate Law is more than targets on paper; it is a promise made to the next generation, those people sitting over there. (The speaker gestures to the visitors' gallery) More important than setting a numerical target is making sure we stay on the right course with ambition, with balance, and with real results. What truly defines European leadership is not an obsession with numbers, but the ability to deliver meaningful, sustainable progress without sacrificing the competitiveness that sustains our European social model and democracy. Because this is not just about saving the planet; it is about building a new economic model: green, fair and competitive. But let us be clear: our industries are under pressure like never before. Without investment, without innovation, without affordable energy, this transition will come at the cost of deindustrialisation, and that cannot happen. We need flexibility, we need to reduce energy costs, we need to invest in a new generation of technologies – ones that not only reduce emissions but capture them, that make emissions negative. Establishing a European Industrial Decarbonisation Bank with over EUR 100 billion in funding could be a strong step forward, but private investment will also be essential. And above all, we must ensure no one is left behind. Compensation mechanisms such as the ETS must support Europeans, turning the transition into an opportunity, not a burden. Our goals must be guided by science and by courage – that courage to act, to lead, to believe. Because this law is not just about the climate, it is about us and about what we leave to those who come after us.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Europe is a world power in innovation. clean tech. We lead in patents, research and development and green technologies, but we need to turn that innovation into robust industrial ecosystems. And why? Funding is fragmented, risk-averse and too slow. We have a historic opportunity. The European clean tech sector requires more than €1.5 billion by 2030. And this is not a cost, it is an investment with economic and social return. We need risk-mitigation tools, green loans, production-based finance and, above all, a new way of assessing risk and value in a world in climate transition. The financial sector plays an essential role. It is not enough to preserve value, we must create it. A just transition requires capital to reach out to innovators, entrepreneurs, transforming territories and industries that decarbonise. Our ambition is clear: make the Clean Industrial Deal making Europe a world leader in this transition. Invest in what counts, support those who dare. This is a design of this Parliament, but it must also be of the leaders of the national governments.

Mr President, the digitalisation of our societies and economies has long ceased to be a challenge for the distant future. The digital transition is a reality today and technological innovation has gained a speed that we must keep up with, otherwise we will fall behind again. Of course we need a digital euro; if it means more financial freedom for people. Of course, we need a digital identity; if this facilitates the relationship with public services or processes as simple as opening a bank account or taking out insurance. And of course we need digital markets to increase the range of opportunities for our companies, especially SMEs and SMEs. start up. All this is clear and must be achieved with data protection and privacy. The choice is not between progress and utopia, but between the digital that serves people and the digital that controls them. That is why we must make Europe's digital sovereignty a reality. For this, we need more investment and less regulation, more decision-making agility and less red tape in innovation. It is time to move from being the Old Continent to being the Europe of the future.

Madam President, water is a scarce, finite and irreplaceable resource. In Portugal, we know its value well – we often face severe droughts, which is why the government launched the ‘Water that unites’ strategy not so long ago, with very concrete measures such as the construction of dams and the recovery of the supply network. Water knows no boundaries. In a territory as diverse as the European Union, coordinated management, joint vision and common response are required. Extreme events – such as the drought in the Algarve and the floods in Valencia – show that the time to act is now. The creation of a European strategy for water resilience is therefore an unavoidable priority and must also protect this vital asset from threats, such as dangerous chemicals that undermine its security. This strategy is not just a response to the present; It is a commitment to the new generations.

Thank you very much, Honourable Member, for the question. If by internal market you are referring to the European internal market, I could not agree more. We really have to work to remove all the barriers that still exist, all the barriers that still exist to trade within the borders of the European Union. So, yes, only in this way will we be able to respond robustly to what are the aspirations and desires of our companies, not only Portuguese, but European companies, so that they gain scale, so that they can compete internationally. So I think so. These flaws are already identified in several reports, not only in the report by Mario Draghi, but also by Enrico Letta, where we also have homework to do and, therefore, the strategy is, yes, to diversify our markets in international trade, and yes, to remove the barriers that still exist in the European internal market.

Mr President, Donald Trump has made the United States the country of the blinker. Today yes, tomorrow no, and then no one knows what's next. But in the midst of so much instability and uncertainty, there is a given: the world has changed, and the transatlantic relationship will not be the same again. It is up to us, therefore, to react with unity, but also with strategic vision. Let us not forget that we are a trading power. We must act as such. Today, market diversification is not an option; It really is an urgency. But we have to be quick. Let me give you an example: five months have passed since the signature of the Mercosur agreement, which is still under legal revision and translation into the official languages of each Member State. If we want to protect our market, our industry, our jobs, we need to be more effective, because in a world where everyone is competing for the same markets, those who arrive late lose – and Europe cannot lose.

Mr President, I thank you for the question and tell you that what I find really dangerous is that, in a few decades' time, the European social model will be at stake and that it will not be possible to pay pensions to people of my generation, of our generation. And for this, this Union of Savings and Investments is so necessary. We must find alternative ways of financing social security systems and, in order to ensure the sustainability of social security systems, this debate is central to ensuring that the new generations have a future in their retirement.