Speeches

Dear colleague, our single market has about 450 million consumers. The American market has around 350 million. So, our market is pretty sizeable. It's a big question 'how come we have dwindled in our economic growth?' We know – and I wonder if you can test that – that a big reason for that is that SMEs struggle with administrative burden. Up to 25% of their resources is spent on administrative burden. We also know that many businesses with potential, once they start showing that potential, they are incentivised to move to the United States. So, how exactly do we address the conditions that are lagging for our economic sector to keep businesses in Europe if we don't acknowledge the excess of regulation?

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, connectivity is a basic need for Europeans – 85 % of them have said so, and over 60 % of small and medium-sized businesses need 5G to grow. Reform is an urgent need for Europeans to safely thrive and meet global challenges in the unpredictable world we live in. The Digital Networks Act rightly identifies connectivity as essential for European competitiveness and tech sovereignty. Strengthening wireless network licensing aligns us with global 5G and 6G developments, which is a key step forward. Yet apart from wireless, this proposal does not significantly improve the status quo. Reinforcing competitiveness, deepening the single market and promoting investment are stated as objectives, but not sufficiently reflected in actual measures. Instead, additional complexity has been added. Europe can no longer afford overregulation, fragmentation and underinvestment. Let's not waste this chance to deepen the single market and finally bring our tech sector the conditions for it to grow and catch up with our global competitors.

How can we truly keep our nation safe and protect ourselves from the desires of our enemy, Putin, if we give in to his demands? Is it not the lesson from 2014 that Europe's weak response to the annexation of Crimea led to the encouragement of Putin invading Ukraine? Is it not the lesson from the Second World War that when we stand up and show that we will not capitulate, in the end we are safer and can safeguard our way of living? Is that not also the lesson from the Cold War? How are you claiming to protect our nations – keep us safe, keep us strong – if you give in to these demands?

Mr President, Commissioners, colleagues, our single market has over 450 million people, 100 million more than the US market, which means that our market is a third larger than that of the US. Yet, the number one complaint I hear from ambitious people willing to take risks – especially in the tech sector – is that they can't operate in the single market. Why is that? Because on top of excessive EU regulation, they need to deal with 27 different jurisdictions. One of Europe's core weaknesses, as highlighted in the Draghi report. Tax simplification comes hand in hand with market harmonisation. This does not mean EU taxes. Member States should remain autonomous in setting taxes. It does mean simplifying procedures and making the single market truly accessible for Europe's talent to focus on innovation instead of accounting. A streamlined digital‑first tax framework with predictable rules would do more for Europe's competitiveness than funding, so this report points in the right direction. Let's treat tax simplification as a competitiveness reform because that's exactly what it is.

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, over six million vehicles reach the end of their lives across Europe each year. Right now we are treating valuable materials like waste when we should be treating them like assets. Many of the metals, plastics and critical minerals that Europe needs are contained in these vehicles. Letting them disappear into landfills and incineration plants makes no economic sense. Replacing the outdated directive with a future‑proof regulation makes recovery possible. It creates a new portal to cut red tape, harmonise rules that allow a single market for recycled materials to grow, and technology‑neutral targets that reward business for results, not for following prescribed methods. The goal is straightforward – maximise environmental benefits, minimise the regulatory burden, and give industry room to innovate and remain competitive. This regulation removes obstacles to a bigger market that can optimise existing resources, giving us one more example of somewhere economic competitiveness and environmental aims can converge.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Portuguese people are well aware of the cost of unpreparedness. In 2022, more than 120 000 hectares burned, almost twice the average of the last decade. We have lost more than 30% of the treated water, well above countries like Denmark and the Netherlands, which lose 10% less and do not face regular droughts like us. Increasingly extreme weather events are the new normal. Therefore, when droughts, fires, floods return year after year, they are not unexpected phenomena, they are governance failures. It is a good sign that the Commission is mobilising air resources, investing in warning systems and developing risk scenarios. But it should be clear that Member States have to solve problems such as land abandonment and waste of water in the grid. There are countries, such as Portugal, that cannot even complete the registration of their rural property. Thus, it is impossible to have forest management, which should be the main priority in fire prevention. There is a clear economic logic: Remediation is more expensive than prevention. And European funds should reward those preparing, not sustain inefficiencies.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Portuguese people are well aware of the cost of unpreparedness. In 2022, more than 120 000 hectares burned, almost twice the average of the last decade. We have lost more than 30% of the treated water, well above countries like Denmark and the Netherlands, which lose 10% less and do not face regular droughts like us. Increasingly extreme weather events are the new normal. Therefore, when droughts, fires, floods return year after year, they are not unexpected phenomena, they are governance failures. It is a good sign that the Commission is mobilising air resources, investing in warning systems and developing risk scenarios. But it should be clear that Member States have to solve problems such as land abandonment and waste of water in the grid. There are countries, such as Portugal, that cannot even complete the registration of their rural property. Thus, it is impossible to have forest management, which should be the main priority in fire prevention. There is a clear economic logic: Remediation is more expensive than prevention. And European funds should reward those preparing, not sustain inefficiencies.

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, Europe controls the largest maritime area on Earth, yet we treat the ocean as a blind spot rather than our competitive advantage. The Ocean Pact is an important first step to deliver change, and we must ensure that change means targeted action anchored in strategic investments and measurable results. The Ocean Pact correctly identifies six essential priorities: ocean health, blue economy, resilient coastal communities, technological innovation, maritime security and global leadership. But priorities without execution are merely aspirations, and our continent's prosperity depends on the ocean as both a climate stabiliser and a backbone of global trade. Markets need clarity. Innovators need capital and citizens need proof that the EU can deliver results. The pact's focus on implementation before more regulation is a step in the right direction, but we must see more clarity soon. What is the timeline for the blue carbon reserve? How will we mobilise private investment to complement EU funds? And EUR 1 billion in EU funds will be allocated to ocean-related projects. Will the EU see the Ocean Pact as an opportunity to revise our funding policy and address the challenges our continent faces? If we want progress, we must empower initiative and unlock innovation, because innovation is key to deliver on recovering oceans' health, economic competitiveness and security.

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, innovation in water infrastructure and its management should be the cornerstones of the water resilience framework. This is a strategic policy for Europe, crucial for our defence, for human and environmental well-being, as well as for our competitiveness, especially as agriculture, AI, energy systems – just some examples – depend heavily on water. Europe has pioneered water management technologies throughout history because floods and droughts have been cyclical for a very long time. Now, extreme weather events are likely to increase these phenomena both in the north and south of Europe alike. As we move to invest in resilient infrastructure, we must not only look towards the future but learn from the investments made thus far. The EU has funded water infrastructure in the south of Europe. Still, countries in this region where water is scarcer register high rates of water losses. Portugal, for example, recently lost 30% of its total water supply in just one year, and some regions in Greece have up to 80% of water losses. To build a shared water resilience, we must have shared accountability. Europe must coordinate among Member States to invest smartly, innovate boldly and deliver measurable results.

Mr President, Commissioner, an ocean at risk is also an economic risk and a struggling economy is also a threat to the environment. The ocean is a key climate regulator, capturing 90% of the excess heat from carbon emissions, hosting 80% of global biodiversity and generating half of our oxygen. Despite this vital role, the ocean has not been prioritised in the European Union’s climate policy, when it is relevant for addressing Europe’s main challenges, from climate adaptation, economic competitiveness and increasing our defence capacity. 99% of our data transfers flow through submarine cables and 90% of our international trade moves by sea. Protecting critical infrastructure is crucial for a sound environmental, economic and defence policy with a comprehensive approach to ocean governance. It is time for the ocean to become central to the European Union’s climate policy by integrating scientific research, market-driven decarbonisation solutions as well as maritime security. Europe has the largest maritime area in the world, of which Portugal has the largest Exclusive Economic Zone. The Ocean Pact should be a strategic framework for European leadership in an increasingly unpredictable world. Let us overcome false dichotomies such as choosing between economy and environment or between simplification and decarbonisation.

Mr President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, let us be clear about what's really at stake with the Mercosur agreement. It's not just Europe's economic future. It's our international credibility after stalling this deal for more than 20 years. It's about where we stand in a world where the global balance of powers is shifting and Europe is struggling to defend its interests. Some warn of threats to our industry and farmers. They're missing the crucial point. Our economy doesn't struggle because of international competition. It struggles under the weight of excessive regulatory burdens. This agreement cuts tariffs on key European exports while maintaining environmental standards. It gives small and medium-sized enterprises, the backbone of our economy, access to new opportunities in a market of nearly 300 million consumers. Yet some prefer to walk away because of fair competition. Here's a real threat: not competition, but risk aversion; not trade, but excessive bureaucracy. We burden our businesses with excessive regulations, and then we wonder why we struggle globally. While we hesitate, China is acting fast. It has already replaced Europe as South America's primary trading partner. The path to European competitiveness isn't through isolation, it's through strategic engagement.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, Venezuelans have bravely resisted and fought to defend their democratic rights and the electoral result which elected Edmundo González as its legitimate president, and which the European Union has rightly recognised as such. The appeals of Venezuelans, supported by the international community, were ignored with the illegitimate inauguration of Nicolás Maduro. We must signal to the brave Venezuelans who remain in the opposition that we will not forget them just because Nicolás Maduro was sworn in. Maria Corina Machado is among many political opponents who are subjected to arbitrary detention, torture and yet resist and fight for their freedom. One of those arrested is Jesús Armas – a human rights activist whom Maduro had tortured – who has been imprisoned for more than 40 days, without access to visits or a lawyer and without defence. Moreover, European countries must establish humanitarian corridors so that exiles who have been held in embassies for months can safely apply for asylum. The European Union has set an example by highlighting one of the biggest electoral frauds in history and by recognising the legitimate outcome of the elections. It is imperative that we do so not only to defend our values in other parts of the world. It is imperative that you do so for the defence of freedom and democracy here in Europe as well. The fight against democratic backsliding is global.

Mr President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, in the early days of social media, there was hope that millions of people living under oppressive regimes would be empowered with different points of view and even inspired to fight for their freedoms. Now, social media is considered one of the main threats against democracies because they are wielded as a weapon by those who wish to destabilise and weaken our free societies. If one really cares about democracy and freedom, in particular freedom of speech, one must defend transparency and accountability of those who spread any kind of information, be they government, be they political candidates, be they traditional media, be they social platforms, especially during electoral periods. That is why, historically, we've had laws that are more demanding in electoral periods. In a new, fast-evolving information ecosystem, we must make sure that citizens are empowered to make informed choices, that they know who is behind the information that reaches them, how it is financed and promoted. Let us not lose sight that the aim should always be to empower citizens, not to empower platforms or governments, especially not foreign governments who suppress the freedom of the people they rule over.

Ladies and gentlemen, if you look at the latest report published by the European Commission, which mentions precisely that increased competitiveness and liberalisation, especially on high-speed connections, have contributed to lower fares, to improving the quality of service and, above all, to increasing the percentage of use by consumers. So, yeah, I think that's the way to go. I think we also have a lot of questions to ask about the dominance of the state in this transport sector. In fact, we are both Portuguese. We know that constant strikes – because the state also fails its workers – have been one of the priority causes of this problem. And by the way, maybe it's also time to give back to passengers, who have rights, what they lose when they don't have the service they hired.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, environmental sustainability and economic competitiveness are priorities for Europe. The transport sector is the only sector where carbon emissions have increased in the last 35 years, being the second largest responsible for these emissions. We know that rail pollutes less and is more energy efficient, but it accounts for only 7% of passenger transport, compared to 72% for cars. There are many reasons, but they all go the same way. The railway is not attractive to consumers. The train is expensive, it is not known if it arrives on time or if it always comes and, for many, it does not even exist as an alternative. To get from Lisbon to Madrid, there is a direct flight, but there is no direct train. Guess what people prefer? Removing barriers, be they linguistic, operational and, above all, legal in 27 jurisdictions, is key so that European citizens can choose the train, rather than the plane or the car. The free movement of people and goods is at the heart of the European project and it is time, more than ever, to connect Europe, rail by rail.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the most recent episode of uncontrolled fires in Europe took place in Portugal last month. Seven years have passed since the tragedy of Pedrógão Grande, which so marked our nation. The Socialist Party left the government this year. 78% of rural properties remain unregistered. In 2023, the budget for fire prevention was reduced by around EUR 60 million. It is not only after the flames strike that it is important to react or that it is urgent to react. There is an urgent need for European governments to focus on preventing fires, combating the abandonment of rural land and increasing economic activity in the hinterland to encourage good land management. These are obvious priorities. Tragedy is always difficult to overcome, especially when we know we could have prevented it.

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, social media can liberate the voice of otherwise-silenced individuals, and spread old and new ideas. It also enables threats to the life and physical integrity of individuals, as well as deliberate attempts to undermine our democratic systems. Child abuse, encouraging violence on our streets, fake political endorsements, algorithms and bots – who are not people – that deliberately promote agendas while suppressing contrasting views are a few examples that we cannot ignore. The Digital Services Act took an important step in demanding transparency and accountability mechanisms of very large online platforms. Individuals must be empowered with tools for assessing credible information. Now, fighting disinformation does not excuse restricting free speech in the way we just saw in Brazil – a full ban on a platform for refusing to take down a few accounts is a disproportionate illiberal measure only seen, until now, in autocracies. Democracies face threats by standing up for what sets them apart, not by imitating autocracies.