The Union’s preparedness for and response to health emergencies: the case of the MV Hondius and the hantavirus warning (debate)
Madam President, let us imagine that, in the wake of the far right, Europe had followed in the footsteps of Trump and left the World Health Organization. Now, in the face of the hantavirus outbreak, we would be completely in the dark, with no alerts, no coordination, no response. Fortunately, that is not the case, and indeed the United States should thank the rest of the world for maintaining international cooperation that protects us all. Thanks to this, and without minimizing the tragedy for the victims and their families, there is no reason for alarm. In Europe, the risk is very low, the situation is under control, but this security requires continued external coordination and cooperation. It is factual proof that no country can protect its citizens in isolation. It's also proof that taking out a health budget to dispose of guns won't make us safer. Our best defense is in science, strong health services, medical research for new antivirals and, of course, support for WHO and international surveillance networks.
High time to deliver on the Single Market, providing certainty and predictability for EU businesses and quality jobs (continuation of debate)
Madam President, the single market is a kind of horizon for liberals. Thirty-three years after its creation, it is said that it does not yet exist. But there is a single market and there is liberalisation, there is free movement of capital, provision of services, free trade – what there is not is the prosperity they have promised. In Portugal, the liberalization of communications privatized and closed post offices throughout the territory and destroyed the largest technology company in the country, PT. Energy is controlled by China and one month of liberalized income costs more than the entire salary. With each liberalisation, with each market step, they promise "the next one is". Let's be serious. Why do liberals pretend that there is no internal market? Because they do everything in their power not to acknowledge their responsibilities. The backwardness that Europe has accumulated in relation to any other economic area, the mediocre performance of our economies, the hopelessness of the young generations, the bankruptcy of the welfare state is a single market, it is liberalism and it does not work. It's not better for Portugal, it's not better for Europe, it's only better for those who already have a lot of money.
EU governance under pressure – institutional responses to global challenges (debate)
Mr President, tax rules must be decided by qualified majority in order to wipe out the Member States. offshore? Is it necessary to decide social, labor and environmental minimums to prevent the race to the bottom? Do we need cooperation projects between Member States? Let's do it. We need a Union that values rights more than markets, that protects the planet more than profits, that fights more for peace, instead of watching wars or wanting to create more armies. But when we discuss the governance of the European Union, we are going to talk about the concrete, because for some it is always more centralised power and for the stronger the argument is that it is changing. Now it's the emergencies. Emergencies are real: cost of living, housing, health, climate, war. But it is necessary to speed up decision-making processes for some of the concrete objectives of people's lives, because what we do not need certainty is a kind of state of siege, where everything is imposed, everything is centralized and nothing is scrutinized. Responding to emergencies? Yes, yes. Using them to subtract decisions from democracy? No, no. History has proven that this is the worst of paths.
EU cybersecurity and preparedness in view of advanced AI systems (debate)
We are not prepared in Europe, which is why I believe it is crucial that we develop models of artificial intelligence, with the ethical, democratic and environmental criteria that we consider important, even to protect our democracy. There is a Portuguese poet who says "It is not yet the end nor the beginning of the world, calm, it is only a little late". I would say: We're really late.
EU cybersecurity and preparedness in view of advanced AI systems (debate)
Madam President, Commissioner, 'the hard power This century will be built on software.» The phrase is from the manifesto of Palantir, a company created by the CIA in 2003 that registered with the European Commission as an artificial intelligence literacy company that both guides bombings in Iran and serves for the German police to track people. Last month, two Big Techs The United States has launched sophisticated artificial intelligence systems that have proven capable of detecting and attacking points of vulnerability without any human intervention. The cybersecurity of hospital systems, power grids and other infrastructure is at risk. Companies across Europe use AI's argument to lay off workers, even if they often re-hire them, but they are more precarious and for less pay. It is, moreover, unproven that AI has generated productivity gains in the economy. Until you see, it's a gigantic financial bubble and, yes, war. This is not, therefore, the time to deregulate or simplify, as the Commission calls it. Rather, we need ethical models developed in Europe, research and development entities involved in building such central tools in today's world. We need effective regulators with more means to inspect and license. At a time when there is talk of greater use of AI in the health area, with these systems it will be possible to use the data to train medical systems and rebuild them. We are talking about highly sensitive and private genetic or clinical data of citizens. Commissioner, the choice is urgent: security, freedom, democracy.
European solidarity: key to securing medicine access in a shifting geopolitical era (debate)
Mr President, Commissioner, Europe invests a lot – and well – in health innovation and medicine innovation, but then agrees to pay stratospheric prices for new medicines, supposedly to pay for the risk that we already paid when we paid for the investment and still accepted the relocation of generic medicines, because that was the only way to have affordable prices. It's a lot of public investment that then results in private millionaire profits. And what was already bad gets worse when, in the face of global uncertainty, we realize that we can even run out of medicines in Europe. The question now is: what assurances does the Commission give that it will correct this? Because, if production in Europe remains optional, even in public programmes that are designed to increase European capacity, if the Commission can or cannot launch joint purchases of critical medicines and orphan medicines and if solidarity in stocks between Member States is optional, what will change? I don't know what we negotiated, but I know that Trump is threatening the price of Europe's medicines and I know that the Commission remains very concerned about lobbyists and little concerned about the rules for the pharmaceutical industry. And you know, Commissioner, industrial policy is indeed a public policy. It will not be the pharmaceutical industry that ensures Europe – that security is our role.
Women’s entrepreneurship in rural and island areas and outermost regions (debate)
Madam President, women do not lack the capacity to work, to take decisions, to take risks or to build new projects. But there is a heavy anchor that makes everything more difficult: the burden of domestic and family care, daily violence and its downgrading – patriarchy, therefore. In rural and outermost areas, this burden is greater. Access to public services is scarce, protection from violence is lacking, and access to sexual and reproductive rights is lacking. Looking at Portugal, the scenario is unambiguous. In the rural world, ‑se schools, health centers, post offices have closed. In Madeira, domestic violence exceeds the national average and, in the Azores, the teenage pregnancy rate is twice the national rate. Where there is a lack of nurseries and support for the elderly, where the hospital is miles away and public transport is not enough, there is always a woman carrying the faults of the state on her shoulders. I welcome Parliament's report for not forgetting this. But I ask you, Commissioner, whether, in the budget that the Commission is preparing, in which it wants to cut back on social and agricultural cohesion policies, account has already been taken of how much of this responsibility will weigh on women's shoulders.
Mrs Miranda, thank you for talking here about fatphobia. It's a topic that hadn't been talked about yet. The stigma associated with obesity is very heavy. We also talked about socio-economic factors, they are important. But it is true that the stigma increases and with the bullying Social media is growing even more. I would like to ask ‑ if he thinks that at European level we can do more to combat stigma and to combat bullying What about Fatophobia?
Madam President, there are two myths about obesity that must be dismantled. That is merely a matter of individual choices, it is not. And that is a problem that is solved only with health policies, it is not so either. It's actually how we organize ourselves as a society. There are 8 billion people with obesity in the world. More than 400 million are children and we have more than 1.7 million premature deaths each year. Yes, individual factors are complex and unique, but the causes are a combination of known environmental, economic and social factors. With ultra-processed food, cheaper than healthy food, in an economy of low wages and unregulated work, with hours so long that they prevent adequate hours of sleep, where sports are expensive and the screen is the cheapest entertainment, everything is designed so that obesity continues to increase. And, Commissioner, the European Commission's policies, as you see, are a good part of the problem. Innovative medicines to treat obesity exist, but they are still only available to a few and must be accessible to all. And that's a decision about health that we can't postpone. But no medication changes our primary responsibility: prevent the disease. And for that, we have to change a lot. A first step: ensure that healthy choices are affordable and not a luxury. The price of food, and fresh food, is a huge burden for families today and that is not acceptable. And, of course, we have to have the courage to regulate the market and stop selling as food what is not food.
Mr President, while the people of Europe are despairing at the rise in energy prices, the Commission decides to say that it will lower them and do the exact opposite. At the same time, the Commission manages to increase the cost of living and discredit the institutions, which is the new normal. We are now experiencing a new episode of this political farce, while the United States and Israel attack Iran – committing yet another international crime and provoking a parade of atrocities – the response of European leaders ranges from cowardice to more propaganda. And the Commission announces plans to cut energy bills for citizens, while accepting the war that drives prices up. The new mandate of the Commission and this Parliament, moreover, began with numerous setbacks in climate commitments that were already insufficient. Disinvestment in the response to climate change has been mitigated by the warming of propaganda. Commissioner, it is all of us who are under attack. War and the energy crisis attack ‑nos in our daily lives. Betrayal of climate commitments attacks our future and, as always, it will be the poorest to pay.
Gender pay and pension gap in the EU: state of play, challenges and the way forward, and developing guidelines for the better evaluation and fairer remuneration of work in female-dominated sectors (debate)
Madam President, fix these figures: men are 41% of the Portuguese workforce with tertiary education, but occupy 84% of top positions in companies. Is it really merit? Across the European Union, women earn on average 12% less. In some countries the difference is more than 18%, working 54-67 days a year without pay. And we already know: Low wages condemn low pensions. In Portugal, women would have to work almost three months each year more to have the same annual salary and do three times as many homework and care tasks, those that never enter the salary or pension bills, just tiredness. And there are those who take advantage of this fatigue to try to push women home. The old machismo of old, with modern clothes of influencer, tries to convince us that women's happiness will be indoors and caring. For these, I have two answers: The idealized past of caring and happy women at home never existed. Women have always worked hard and at everything. The difference is whether or not work is paid, whether or not it is recognized. And we know what they want. They want women out of the public space, out of the workplace, out of the economy, out of decision-making. They want to maintain macho privilege and take away our independence and power. Condemn us to subservience, humiliation and violence. We're not going backwards. What we demand here is the fair sharing of care and public care services from daycare to support for old age. And we want equal pay, equal respect.
Extreme weather events in particular in Portugal, southern Italy, Malta and Greece: European response in strengthening readiness, preparedness and solidarity mechanisms (debate)
A new action plan to implement the European Pillar of Social Rights (debate)
Madam President, Madam Vice-President, the right wants to convince us that the European Union has the power to destroy rights, but not to create. It may require liberalisation of labour law, but not labour rights. It may require privatization of public services, but not the right to health or housing. It's not about competence, it's about choice - and your side is clear. The left, for its part, has been fighting for the European social model to be something more than a propaganda article. Protecting and re-founding the post-war social contract (with robust public services, with dignity for all people throughout life and strong labour rights, including, yes, minimum wage, protection of those working for platforms or the right to disconnect) is the minimum of the minimum. Demanding an effective social pillar and for these times is a choice about the Europe we want. A Europe of rights or a Europe of the race to the bottom. This choice will decide not only the future of Europe, but the future of democracy.
Case of Joseph Figueira Martin in the Central African Republic
Madam President, we are talking about a case of life or death. We're talking about a man who was kidnapped by the Wagner Group a year and a half ago, who was tortured. It was handed over by the Wagner Group to the Central African Republic and barbarism continued. He was tried in a trial without guarantees of justice and sentenced to an absolutely inhuman sentence of ten years of forced labour. We are talking about Joseph Figueira Martin, an anthropologist, humanitarian worker, with dual nationality: Portuguese and Belgian. But if we were to talk about any citizen, anywhere in the world, this whole story would be unacceptable - and this has to stop. Of course we are in the European Parliament and we have an increased responsibility to defend the citizens of the European Union. And here we are, and it is also for this fellow-countryman of mine - fellow-citizen - that I speak. The least the European Parliament can do is demand his immediate release. We did it in July; the situation has worsened. And the problem is that, if the European Parliament can continue to table resolutions calling for release, we do not know how much longer this man can wait, because his health is deteriorating at every moment. That is why this joint position and this determination of the European Parliament to ensure that Joseph Figueira Martin is released is very important. If all the other reasons for the abuse of rights were sufficient, let us now also look at the humanitarian reason for his poor health.
Framework for achieving climate neutrality (debate)
Mr President, Commissioner, the right tries to justify the retreats in the Green Pact with two arguments which are two lies: competitiveness and costs for families. On competitiveness, we understand, even China already has an agenda for the energy transition and the European retreat will only have two consequences: technological backwardness and jeopardising European companies that see their efforts in vain. Going back into the environment is a mistake. Moreover, there is no competition with the planet, there is only one planet and our responsibility is to have an economic model that allows the life of the human species on Earth. As for costs for households, the energy transition, if done well, only lowers costs and thus frees up wages. Good free and efficient public transport protects the environment and protects the wallet. Decentralized renewable energy production lowers the bill for light, allows more efficient and comfortable homes. If we play less with green taxes, which are anything but green and only serve to ease the conscience of the big polluters, and if we invest seriously in the just transition, those who live off their work only have to earn, even in better jobs and better wages. Meanwhile, the irresponsible far-right deniers, the retreat of the right and the lack of courage of socialists and greens, keep us in this situation of going to vote on emissions reduction targets that are a farce. It will not be for us that the European Union is without reduction targets, but we will not fail to denounce what we have here: with so many flexibility mechanisms, there is no guarantee of reduction here. We will not lower our arms! There is no planet B!
Breast cancer: the importance of screening (debate)
Madam President, Commissioner, one in eight women will be diagnosed with breast cancer in their lifetime. Every year in Europe, half a million women receive this diagnosis and 125,000 die. Tragically, the risk has increased even in young women, but the evolution of health brings hope to all women. This hope has three conditions: timely diagnosis, appropriate treatment and follow-up. For this, we need robust, universal and timely health services, not health cuts. We need health literacy, more and better education, and fewer prejudices and taboos. Fighting the stigma and celebrating the survivors also saves us all. And we need living conditions. Yes, women postpone appointments and diagnostic tests too often, because work has too many hours, outside and inside the home, because they give priority to caring for others – children, parents, companions, family – and when they need care too often they are left alone. October is Breast Cancer Visibility Month. Every month is to fight for women's health and lives. A final call: do the screening.
UN Climate Change Conference 2025 in Belém, Brazil (COP30) (debate)
Madam President, Commissioner, in August 2024, the world reached two degrees centigrade for the first time. Europe is the fastest warming continent. In my country, in Portugal, summer fires never let us forget that climate change is our present. Ten years ago, the Paris Agreement sealed the global promise of every effort being made not to exceed one and a half degrees. It didn't happen. Oil has always spoken louder. We are going to the 30th COP, and there will be a lot of people wondering if we can still expect anything. In the face of Trump's denialism, the inaction of the European Commission and governments, Parliament's resolution does not quite give up on effective changes to a strategy to end the fossil. But there is a tragic setback: militarization as an exception and that jeopardizes all objectives. Signs of global hope come to us today from environmental movements. At COP30, in Brazil, indigenous peoples make themselves heard and, in the parliamentary commitments made, there is a dedicated section that recognises their rights, their indispensable role. We now propose one more step. If we want the end of the fossil, this is also a time of opposition to new oil exploration projects in the Amazon. I invite Members to vote on this compromise coming from the Peoples' Summit, and I ask the Commissioner whether he will have time to meet with the Peoples' Summit and get to know its demands, or whether all his time will be for the oil lobby. One thing I know: the social movement has driven the environmental agenda to this day, and COP30 must be the moment for more social movement.
World Mental Health Day - addressing the socio-economic factors (debate)
Mr President, Commissioner, not being able to pay for the house, living in an overcrowded house and postponing life projects puts mental health at risk. Working underpaid, with long hours and precarious contracts, puts mental health at risk. When education is a competition, rather than a learning, it puts mental health at risk. On top of all this, having homework and care tasks, without the support of quality public services, and still dealing with everyday macho violence, yes, puts mental health in question. Poverty puts mental health at risk. The European Commission says it is concerned about all this, but it promotes property speculation, overexploitation of labour and disinvestment in the welfare state and public services. I do not forget that the European Commission in 2016 opposed raising the minimum wage in my country; and I don't forget the struggle it was to do it anyway. But I also know that you are now comforting the Portuguese Government's plans to destroy the few remaining labour rights in my country. Your policy puts at risk mental health and the mismatch between what you proclaim and what you do puts democracy at risk.
Second World Summit for Social Development (debate)
Mr President, Commissioner, when the Second World Summit for Social Development meets next month, 30 years will have passed since the Copenhagen compromise, without us being able to live up to what was required. In a world of growing inequalities and growing political forces betting everything on putting workers against workers, and following Donald Trump’s decision to end USAID, which is estimated to kill more than 14 million people in the world – especially children – by 2030 for lack of vaccines and food, holding this summit in Qatar is tragic cynicism. That at least this Parliament is able to fight for strong commitments; poverty eradication, decent employment, social cohesion are goals that can be achieved – there is political will. This is the time for the European Union to lead by example. The phrase that is repeated so many times and practiced so little. Commitment to development is not a favor, it is an obligation and must be an instrument of peace. Solidarity is not a weakness, it is a strength.