Speeches

Madam President, Commissioner, there is no doubt that major changes have taken place in the Middle East in recent times. Part of the siege of terror was broken. Iran will experience a transition that it will not be able to escape and that will be advocated by its own citizens. It's not going to be an outside influence, but it's going to be a change from the inside out in Iran, on the one hand. On the other hand, their proxies, like the Houthis, like Hamas, like Hezbollah, will no longer have the fantastic bed they had, with Iran supporting it. My dear friends, it is time for change, but it is time for complicated change because we have Syria as well, which has a situation that is not easy and will not be easy to solve, in either transition or final period. Therefore, we will have to be very attentive to all this evolution. The painting has changed. Human rights, as everyone here has said (I'm not going to talk about it anymore), are in danger, but the fact is that all the geopolitics in the region has changed and will be very problematic.

Madam President, Commissioner, there is no doubt that major changes have taken place in the Middle East in recent times. Part of the siege of terror was broken. Iran will experience a transition that it will not be able to escape and that will be advocated by its own citizens. It's not going to be an outside influence, but it's going to be a change from the inside out in Iran, on the one hand. On the other hand, their proxies, like the Houthis, like Hamas, like Hezbollah, will no longer have the fantastic bed they had, with Iran supporting it. My dear friends, it is time for change, but it is time for complicated change because we have Syria as well, which has a situation that is not easy and will not be easy to solve, in either transition or final period. Therefore, we will have to be very attentive to all this evolution. The painting has changed. Human rights, as everyone here has said (I'm not going to talk about it anymore), are in danger, but the fact is that all the geopolitics in the region has changed and will be very problematic.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, enlargement is strategically essential for the European Union. We speak for ourselves and for what Portugal has gained by joining the European Union, and we want the other candidate countries to also win when they join the European Union. But this must be done in strict compliance with the Copenhagen criteria. timings exactly the same as each other. There should be no first and second speeds, there should be no children and stepchildren in this adherence, on the one hand. On the other hand, we need to clean the house –– our European house –– because our European house, like any other house, needs maintenance, and that maintenance has not been done. Such maintenance is absolutely necessary before any enlargement. We must revise the Treaties, we must revise our own Union and the principles and values by which we are governed, because many years have passed since the beginning of this great project, which is the European Union, and the world has changed. The global world has changed. Strategically, we have other challenges that we did not have at that time, and we need to tackle those challenges in a more modern, more proactive and, above all, more effective and active way for ourselves Europeans. I would therefore like to leave this message here and say yes to enlargement, but to an enlargement tailored to the 21st century and not to an enlargement tailored to the 20th century.

Madam President, Commissioner, this Pact has positive aspects, but it also has very negative aspects. In particular, it tries to defend biodiversity, but at the same time approves projects that damage habitatsThey expel fishermen and privatise the sea, which is in the public domain. I am talking about wind farms at sea, which are serious both for those who fish, for the maritime population and for the countries themselves. On the other hand, the aquaculture farms that have been benefited by the Commission in my country, Portugal, have not been a success. On the contrary, because many people receive the money and drop aquaculture, which is currently a source of marine pollution. Therefore, Commissioner, I believe that this Pact must be revised with a view to improving the lives of European citizens. Because from today to tomorrow, Commissioner, we will not be able to eat wind shovel stews. We have to eat fish stews; And if there are no fishermen, there is no fish, if there is no fishing, there is no fish.

We are no one's accomplices, Mr President-in-Office. And, for now, the UN estimates are worth what they are worth. As you know, most of the humanitarian aid goes directly to Hamas and not to the population, and you have to know, these are proven facts. That is an aspect, it has nothing to do with Mr Netanyahu, nor do I know him personally. When I lived in the region, Mr. Netanyahu was a nobody, now it looks like he's prime minister. So it has nothing to do with him, it has to do, yes, with the Israeli people, it has to do, yes, with the Palestinian people and it has to do with the region and with our security, European security, it has a lot to do with that. However, I find it very strange that the honourable Member is so outraged by what is happening in Gaza, but during the conflict in Bosnia and other conflicts in the Balkans, no one has raised their voices – and many more people have died than are dying now.

First of all, I did not recognise any of this; Secondly, you know perfectly well, I have already said here, that my thesis is very simple: It is now impossible to create a Palestinian state. They've been created five times, five possibilities, all failed. It is impossible to unite Gaza, the West Bank and the Palestinians of Jordan into one unit. So my solution lies in an international administration. That's my solution. And, what else, why do I say this? Because, unlike the honourable Member and the majority of Members here, I have lived in that region for many years. I know the region, I know the people, I know the conflict, and the conflict is not going to end overnight. That's all.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, first I'd like to state very clearly that each life lost is a dramatic loss, and there are too many lost lives in that conflict –number one. Number two, Hamas is a terrorist movement, a criminal one, and they have not only 130 hostages, they have 2 000 130 hostages because they are keeping hostage all the total population of Gaza. They are using human shields and they are using everything they can because their only goal is to destroy Israel. So let's free the hostages, let's disarm Hamas because they are the culprits. If they stand down, there will be no more war. So therefore, we can talk about peace. It's not only Israel that is doing bad moves. Hamas started this. Hamas has to end this.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, today we are celebrating – and it is a reason to celebrate – the end of the Second World War, the greatest war the world has ever known. No, it wasn't 50 million, it wasn't 60 million, it was 75 million, between military, civilians and genocides. 3% of the world's population died as a result of the war. This cannot be repeated. But if the end of the war was good news, the best news was the creation of an area of peace and prosperity called the European Union. And the European Union must be strengthened, but it must be strengthened with sovereign countries, not with federal or federalist structures that want to impose solutions on us. We are different from each other and we have a lot of honour in these differences, and we want to keep them – on the positive side, with collaboration, but each of us is different from the other, and this is highly positive for the creation of a body like the European Union. On the other hand, in terms of defense, it is good that we do not invent much. We have NATO, which is an organization faithful to itself and to ourselves, and which has always flown when we need it. And let us not forget that the United States of America has been the guarantor of our freedom, and we, from now on, must also be the guarantors of our freedom, so that the horrors of this war whose end we are now celebrating will never be repeated.

Well, I do not know whether I understand little or much, but there are those who understand much less than I do, which is the case with the honourable Member. The defeat of the Socialist Youth must have hurt him. I'd like to say the following: it is clear that I do not enter here – as Mr Assis quite rightly said – into Portugal’s internal policies. Now, we are not defending a prime minister who you say is hiding, the prime minister is from another party, he is from another political formation. I don't defend or attack, nor have I come here to attack anyone. I have come simply to say and defend national sovereignty, be it energetic, political, social, cultural or ideological. That's all I came here to do.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, more has already been said here than once that, on 28 April, Portugal and Spain entered the biggest blackout in history. And it was the biggest blackout in history because the others had been smaller, in the past, and with smaller consequences. This blackout was planned, everyone knew it was going to happen, as will other blackouts, as long as this policy, which is an ideological, irresponsible and suicidal energy policy, continues. We were the fourth country to shut down thermal power plants. Why? At the seaside planted, little polluted. Why? What was the counterpart to that? That needs to be known. On the other hand, we do not want any more Commission; we want more sovereignty, we want more Portugal and less Commission. We are not going to solve our problems with a European Grid. And it is not with the green fetish of the green economy, of green production that we will save our countries. We have to think about ourselves. Collaboration? Cooperation? Certainly, but from sovereign countries and not from a supranational or federal entity, as they are trying to do with us, which is the control of a European Grid. We don't want it, we are against it. We stand for interconnected but autonomous networks. Those who do not have energy do not have sovereignty. And Portugal, which has existed for much longer than the European Commission, wants sovereignty and wants its energy.

Mr President, Madam Commissioner, well, it's very simple. Serbia is the most important country in the Western Balkans, and it's a black hole in the heart of Europe. Serbia must join the European Union, period. And I must say that the fault is ours, because the Commission, mainly the Commission, all these years did very little. And then came the Russians, and then came the Chinese – and we were away. The other thing is relations with Kosovo. Well, it's very easy to say. But what about the five European Union countries that do not have relations with Kosovo? Kosovo's independence was declared illegally by Resolution 1244 of the Security Council. So don't push Serbia where Serbia cannot be pushed. Push on other things – civil society, rule of law, closeness to the European Union, and so on – but not on what they cannot do. Serbia was proposed a European future 24 years ago. I know because I was there. Till today, there is no European future for Serbia.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Portugal is not just any country. Portugal is a country of the sea. It is a country that has made its past at sea, has its present at sea and wants to have its future at sea. And, my dear friends, it is not with pacts for the oceans that we will solve our problems. We are tired, but we are tired of words and we are very destitute of actions. It was because of the European Commission in Brussels that our fishing fleet was destroyed, our merchant fleet was destroyed and all industries that were related to the fishing industry were destroyed. These are the facts, because with words for the future we are fed up, this is not what we want. And what's more, to put the cherry on top of the cake, now they want to install wind farms, wind farms all over the Portuguese coast. Is this ecology? No, this is destroying natural resources, it is destroying the Portuguese coast, it is destroying what is most precious to us – it is what our life is all about. Therefore, for the sake of ecology, we attack ecology. For the sake of ecology, natural resources are being destroyed. For the sake of ecology, it declares war on food security and the physical security of its citizens. This cannot be so, this is not what we want. We do not want pacts, we want concrete and definite aid. And I'm not talking about money, I'm talking about concrete actions that can allow the Portuguese and Portugal a better life.

Mr President, Commissioner, before I say a few words, I would like to say how proud I have always been of my mother for working at Radio RARET in Portugal, which was an entity financed by the Americans and which conveyed to the Iron Curtain the ideals of freedom, the ideals that today make us move in Europe and in the Europe that is ours. Freedom of speech is not a detail of democracy. It's your heart. And right now, within the European Union, that heart is under attack. Let's call things by their names: There is a coordinated offensive against free truth. They are the "fact-checkers ‘official’, are the ‘authorised narratives’, are the ‘safety directives’. All packed in very beautiful language, but the truth of the facts is that only, and only, can they have a path, a direction: is that of friends, because others, who are against, who are dissidents, are persecuted in one way or another, as has been seen in recent times. So I think we're on the wrong track. Democracy with one voice is not democracy. It's authoritarianism, it's totalitarianism, and that's what we have to fight against. End censorship in disguise. Take control of the money. Let the truth compete. Letting dissent live. This is where we have to go, these are the principles that have to guide us, because only where there is freedom to disagree, there is freedom to live in democracy.

Madam President, High Representative, dear colleagues, well, as the shadow rapporteur for the Patriots for Europe, I feel compelled to express a fundamental concern. This is not a political disagreement, but a procedural and democratic failure. Every single amendment, Mr McAllister, that I proposed was rejected without debate, without engagement. Not because they were extreme, but because they came from the wrong family. I hope it is not nothing personal against me, of course. So, I give you some examples. The persecution of Christians all over the world, which is probably the group more persecuted these days. The Balkans who live a very sensitive situation right now, mainly in Bosnia, where the Islamisation is in full process. EU funds and human rights violations, I mean, demanding EU funding must never support regimes or organisations to violate basic freedoms and that's not what's happening. So, this has been a report with a lack of democracy, a lack of participation from everybody. Mr McAllister, you are not marginalising me. You are marginalising millions of European citizens who voted for us, for the parties who composed the Patriots for Europe in this Parliament. This Parliament is supposed to be the House of democracy, and my person, the votes on me are the same as the votes on anybody else in this House.

Madam President, Madam Commissioner, well, in its first 100 days the European Commission promised transparency but instead we have seen allegations of corruption, abuse of power and lack of accountability. The European Union should serve its citizens, yet it has become an isolated bubble, funding its own narrative rather than fostering democratic debate. The European Commission, in the former legislature, and the former Vice-President, Frans Timmermans, funnelled millions of euros into environmental NGOs to push the Green Deal without proper oversight. This raises serious concerns about the misuse of public funds to shape policy behind closed doors at the expense of business, jobs and families. The European Commission allocated EUR 45 billion to the resilience and values programme, including EUR 1.5 billion to NGOs aligned with its political agenda. The issue is not defending itself, but the lack of pluralism. Public money should foster open democracy, debate, not reinforce a single political perspective. When confronted about these things, the European Commission refuses to provide concrete answers and avoids open debate. The double standard is evident. When the EU establishment pushes its narrative, it is considered legitimate policy, but if it is challenged, it is dismissed as misinformation. The European Commission cannot continue to operate without scrutiny. European citizens deserve to know where their money is going. Democracy cannot be just a slogan, and we will accept nothing less than full pluralism, transparency and accountability.

Madam President, Commissioner, first of all, those I invite come into my house. Secondly, my home is a place governed by the law, and that law is called the Schengen Agreements. He hasn't seen it, he's not coming in. And whoever enters without a visa, whoever enters without my will, must return home. And this, Commissioner, is a first step. It is flawed, of course, but it is a positive first step towards the return of those who should not be in our home, because national sovereignty and security are affected by this illegal migration. My country was a safe country until two and a half years ago, now it is not a safe country. What is happening in terms of human rights? Portuguese – Europeans – also have human rights. They are the main object of human rights. Why do we hunt down the human rights of the citizens of Europe, the citizens of our countries, the citizens of Portugal, to elevate the human rights of others who enter our home by force and without invitation?

Madam President, Commissioner, the United States has left the Paris Agreement, suspended humanitarian aid and left the World Health Organisation. Disaster. But the reasons why the United States did this are very simple. As far as humanitarian aid is concerned, I can only say one thing: If it's too dirty for the CIA, call USAID. Then, as for the Paris Accords, it seems to be a religion. Everyone has to be in line with the principles of the Paris Agreement. And then, what's going on? It turns out that Europe is in the state it is in and in the state of underdevelopment towards which it is heading. As for the World Health Organization, this magnificent organization that decrees pandemics and wants to create a health passport in order to control populations, because, of course, it has to leave. You cannot stay in a place that is totalitarian and that does not respect citizens and that does not respect people.

Mr President, Mr Commissioner, dear Minister, this must be a joke. In my country alone, the socialists took Portugal to bankruptcy three times in 30 years. Progress is made of this. You can scream wherever you want, but you are not right. It's not because you speak loud that you're right. On the contrary, this idea that the leftist ideas can come forward and be a principle for development. It's a lie. Doesn't work. Never did and never will. We know how to work. We know that liberty, freedom against totalitarianism, taxes, against suffocating the economy. That's what the socialists do. And that's what we can do. And call us the far right; far right is an invention of the Marxists, because they are as totalitarian as they are. We are in favour of the citizens, and we are in favour of the people of Europe to be great again.

Madam President, Madam Commissioner, I can see here that we are discussing a wider, comprehensive EU-Middle East strategy. Let me say one thing: the strategy is the same. I cannot see any kind of improvement. I see difference in the region, but I don't see a different attitude from the European Union. On the contrary, it's more of the same. We now have a ceasefire in Gaza, which is a good step, but it's not enough. We have a ceasefire in Lebanon. Good step, not enough. And the big question mark in Syria, which probably is not a good step and definitely not enough. So we have to take a more proactive approach to these questions. I just have to remember you: five times there was put on the table the solution of two states and five times didn't work, because of the Palestinians, not the Israelis. I remember you Black September in 1970, when King Hussein fought the Palestinians and there was about between – we don't know the numbers – tens and thousands of deaths. Nobody cared about. But now they care because it's the Israelis who are doing it. When it was the Jordanians, nobody cared about it. So is there a solution? Maybe. But the solution goes through an international administration of the Palestinian areas, because they themselves cannot do it, as it is proven. To say 'two-state solution and bye bye' is not a solution. You have to have an international administration of Gaza, international administration of the West Bank and to be very careful with the Palestinians living in Jordan.

Mr President, I do not think that bags have anything to do with this, but I would advise you to read the UNODC report entitled Links Between Smuggling of Migrants and Other Forms of Organised Crime. On the other hand, I will also tell you something, the gentlemen of your party lie, because – and I will give you data for 2023 – the DGRSP report proves that 16.7% of prisoners in prisons are foreigners, 2 036 out of 12 193. Crime has increased in Portugal: 8.2% in crime, 5.6% in violence, drug trafficking rose by 20%, aid for illegal immigration rose by 300 %, and so on. Therefore, it is not we who lie, nor Rita Matias.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the recent report by the United Nations, by UNODC, has revealed what we have known for a long time, and which is not a perception, is that open-door immigration has brought with it countless criminals and criminal organisations. I am not going to blame the migrants here, who have nothing to blame. I will blame the governments that authorised this open-door policy and let criminal gangs into our countries, into the countries of Europe. This is an extremely important matter, because we have armed groups at the moment, we have groups that are determined to impose their own rules on our territory, and this is extremely serious. My dear friends, two and a half years ago, this was not happening in my country, because immigration was controlled. Right now, it's completely out of control. And it is this fact that leads to increased crime and an uncertain future, both for residents and for those who come again. This has to be resolved sooner rather than later.

Madam President, Commissioner, yesterday a historic page was turned in this 21st century, because nothing will be the same after the election of Donald Trump. And nothing will be the same does not mean that it is better or worse, it will be different, surely. In a world – and this is a key point – where we are increasingly moving towards multipolarity rather than bilaterality, we are, as Europe, very important for this multipolarity. Because we have to be partners with the United States, complementary, and work with the United States, because the culture is the same, the civilization is the same, the principles are the same, and we have the same values as the United States. It is not going against the United States that we are going to assert ourselves. It is by collaborating with the United States, collaborating with the new administration, and invigorating Europe, invigorating our countries, that we will move forward. And let us forget this history of the common army. No, no! Let us maintain our security in NATO, which has been the defensive pillar of Europe and the North Atlantic. Let us keep our trade open – as the Commissioner said – let us keep our social and cultural relations open, as they have been in the past and which must be enhanced in the future. It's a future that can be bright if we want to. It is a future that can be ours, that must be ours and only ours, but also with our partners.

Well, the ones who want to push someone to the sea are not the Israelis, it's the Palestinians: 'from the river to the sea', as you know – so that's (A). (B) I didn't say I didn't want a Palestinian state. I just said that a state in these conditions is not realistic. And I mentioned Bosnia and Herzegovina because I served there, as I served in the Middle East, as well, in several countries, and I know the mentality. And, of course, I was thinking about a juridical aspect of how to define the coexistence. And if you see Republika Srpska and the Bosnian Federation, they are as much or almost as much apart as the several populations of Gaza, the West Bank and Jordan. So I didn't say, 'I don't want to'. I said, 'We have to find new solutions, just not only this two-state thing'.

It's very simple. Mr. Trump's first mandate was a peace mandate, ended the wars and, at this point, reached the ceasefire, so I have no doubt in saying it. He also advocated an arms race in the first term, and there were no wars that resulted from it. On the other hand, the move of the Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem – I was there – was a mere paper transfer, because the Embassy in fact continues to operate in Tel Aviv. In Jerusalem, it is the Consulate General, which is theoretically the Embassy, but in fact it is not. So if the honourable Member does not want to see the openings, he does not want to see the future, it is not my problem.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, today is a historic achievement for all of us, for the world, for the United States in particular, and for Europe. We will have the opportunity to discuss this issue, which is the inauguration of President Donald Trump, and that come different times, come. Another historic fact was the ceasefire in Gaza yesterday. It is a small step – the conflict has not been resolved – but it is a step. And this step, in large part, was also due to Trump and his peace initiative. And, my dear friends, today I am going to tell you a little about the two-state solution. It is obvious that the two-state solution alone does not solve anything. They can't even create a Palestinian state, how can they create a state divided into three parts? One third in the Gaza Strip, with no territorial continuity with the West Bank, one third of the population in the West Bank and another third in Jordan. How are we going to create a state in these conditions, when these movements that dominate these populations do not speak to each other, on the contrary, they are bitter enemies? So, my dear friends, instead of filling our mouths with the creation of a Palestinian state, the two-state solution, let us try to find a viable solution. We will try to find a solution like the one they have in Bosnia-Herzegovina, for example, or other solutions that have already been tried in the world. Five times – five times – the two-state solution has failed, and always because of the Palestinians. Let's be imaginative, have the experience of other experiences and let's try to find another solution.