Speeches

Madam President, in recent weeks we have seen a number of workers' struggles all over Europe in demanding better wages, defending and gaining more rights and in the urgency of price control measures in Belgium, Greece, Switzerland, Cyprus, the United Kingdom, France, Spain and others. And also in Portugal, following the major demonstrations on 15 October against the increase in the cost of living. On November 18, the huge adherence to the national strike of Public Administration workers had a great impact on most public services. They are workers who refuse to impoverish themselves and demand solutions to end the devaluation of their wages and careers. From here we support the just demands of the workers and express our solidarity with their class unions. We join your voice in demanding other policies that defend better working and living conditions. The fight continues.

Mr President, another conference and the prospects for a serious and effective fight against climate change are not encouraging. The conclusions of the successive COPs have served to perpetuate injustices. While some continue to suffer, others continue to see business opportunities and negotiate mechanisms to protect their interests, even at the expense of humanity's future. They want to make people believe what no one else believes: whereas the solutions are financial and market-based; The solutions can be left to the goodwill or charity of developed countries or, worse, financial corporations. How can they discuss a reduction in emissions, an energy transition or halting the destruction of ecosystems, not going to the bottom of the question? Let's be serious. The alternative is to defend another system that rationalizes the use of means and resources to be put at the service of society. With the struggle of the peoples, we believe that this day will come. Hopefully sooner rather than later. Capitalism is not green.

Mr President, the conclusions of the G20 agriculture ministers are a long way from responding to the current emergency and food shortage that some people feel. On the contrary, the measures referred to seek only to satisfy one more market, that of innovations and technological agriculture. Once again, we see world leaders bowing, rejoicing at the prospect of opening up to agribusiness, to intensive agriculture, now, on the pretext of access to new technologies. The old problem of food scarcity and lack of food security and sovereignty is the result of the neoliberal agenda, which prioritizes corporate profits over the needs of peoples and small farmers. It is therefore necessary to change the logic of production according to profit for production according to need, to change the production model, or to implement a policy that guarantees small and medium-sized producers fair and rewarding prices and guarantees the right to healthy and adequate food, ensuring food sovereignty and security for peoples. The G20 said nothing about it.

Mr President, it is essential for society to be awake and focused on combating violence against women of any kind, domestic violence, trafficking in women, dating violence, prostitution or even harassment at work and sexual harassment. Above all, it must be borne in mind that the roots of these forms of violence lie in growing social inequalities, a situation which particularly affects women. We live in times when old forms of exploitation return, with the worsening of poverty and social exclusion, the vulnerability of the poorest. Prostitution is an example of this and is a devastating form of violence against women in particular. It is also an expression of social inequalities and a form of slavery that attacks the body and dignity of women. Eradicating violence necessarily requires a change in political, economic, social and cultural models aimed at eliminating all forms of violence against women, but also aiming at eradicating poverty and eliminating inequalities, strengthening social and labour protection, ending precariousness and increasing wages. And the women are grateful.

Mr President, in Portugal this weekend, tens of thousands of workers, young people and pensioners took to the streets in Lisbon and Porto. They do not accept the degradation of wages, the degradation of pensions, the attack on public services, speculation in the prices of essential and energy goods. They shouted loudly that the cost of living is rising and the people can't stand it. At the same time, there is an accumulation of billions of euros in the profits of economic groups, food, energy, large commercial distribution, multinationals. Under no circumstances is it acceptable to increase social injustices, and even less so in this concrete situation. From here, we salute the workers and their trade unions for this initiative of strength, which is at the same time a sign of hope, of trust, of the possibility of another path. And we reaffirm our commitment to workers and their struggle to defend and improve their working and living conditions.

Madam President, today's International Day for the Elimination of Poverty brings to light worrying data on poverty in Portugal. According to Eurostat, at the end of 2021, 2.3 million were poor or at risk of poverty or social exclusion, equivalent to 22.4% of the Portuguese population. Between 2020 and 2021, poverty has worsened, not only in Portugal, but in the European Union at 27, and the 2022 figures will be even more worrying. As the rich get richer, the unfair distribution of wealth and inequality increases. It is essential to increase wages and pensions, combat precariousness and defend employment with rights, strengthen public services and their universal access, public housing policies, which are measures that, combined with the taxation of big capital and the progressivity of tax systems, could reverse the current trend of poverty. But they are slow to arrive, because they run counter to the neoliberal logic that has dominated the policies of the Member States of the European Union for decades.

Mr President, in recent times agricultural producers in Portugal have been exposed and vulnerable to many natural phenomena and disasters, but they have long been confronted with the imposition of a CAP that despises small and medium-sized agriculture, which promotes and finances agribusiness, intensive and super-intensive agriculture, which consumes more water, fertilisers and phytopharmaceuticals, which destroys more soil, without an economic and social valorisation that favours the territory and the people, rather than serving the interests and profits of the economic groups that operate there. Recently, the consequences of the war, of its instigation, of sanctions and speculative actions and exploitation by large economic groups, drag small and medium-sized agricultural productions onto the streets of bitterness and no one wants to take advantage of them. It is immoral that those who, during the pandemic, saw their profits grow at the expense of the suffering of thousands of people should now use the pretext of war to satisfy their insatiable gluttony. We are well aware that, since last year, fertilisers have increased by up to 300 %. Under the pretext of the war, the trend of speculative price increases has worsened, with the consequent increase in production costs. It is urgent to question the production model and to change the logic of production according to profit for production according to necessity, to guarantee the right to national production, particularly in terms of fertilizer production, to ensure the right to food sovereignty and the application of the principle of national preference, replacing imports with national production, to guarantee small and medium-sized farmers fair prices for production, to shorten trade channels, intervening and regulating the value chain.

Madam President, the situation of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises in Portugal is characterised by great instability and fragility, with compulsory closures and reduced activity without proper support following the impacts of the pandemic. Many had not yet fully recovered economic activity and began to experience new difficulties stemming from rising production costs, the impact of the international situation and the inflationary spiral, mainly on energy and fuels. The cost of energy in certain sectors weighs the most heavily on the costs of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, and the rise in speculative fuel prices in gas and electricity could jeopardise the continued activity of some of these companies. While the speculative profits of energy transnationals remain untouched, the solutions for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises are empty. We defend the regulation of energy sector tariffs, in addition to a treasury support fund, as urgent measures. And we reaffirm that the increase in wages, about which nothing was said yesterday and today, is decisive for the dynamization of economic activity, with a positive impact on micro, small and medium-sized enterprises.

Madam President, in countries such as Portugal we have witnessed for decades the destruction of the productive apparatus and the accentuation of the depopulation and desertification of vast areas of the country, sacrificing the essential foundations for a genuine process of economic and social development. The profoundly asymmetric impact of common EU policies on states confirms the need to regain national sovereignty in areas such as industry, agriculture, fisheries or trade, but also energy. The update of the industrial strategy that we are discussing today brings nothing new. It therefore lacks an assessment of the processes of deindustrialisation, the causes of which are, in certain countries such as Portugal, inseparable from these factors. It does not mention the harmful effects of relocation of industrial units to third countries, reduction of wages or attacks on workers' rights. It maintains the logic of competitiveness and the untouchable single market. It continues to advocate that innovation and research and development activities should be at the service of large economic groups, rather than being aligned with each country's development strategy. While funding is being cut in cohesion policy, direct and indirect funding for military industry and research is being increased for the European Union, affirming its militaristic nature, maintaining its project of training the European Army, serving the strategy of NATO and the United States of America. We defend a strategy that values national production and the use of the country's potential for the creation of jobs with rights and the valorization of workers, the fight against external dependence and the affirmation of a sovereign path of development.

Madam President, this resolution directed against Nicaragua, like the one adopted just three months ago, is yet another exercise in concealing facts to cover up an objective stance in support of those who promote destabilization and coup in Nicaragua and who do not hesitate to incite violence and hatred in that country. An unacceptable stance by the European Parliament that runs counter to the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law and that aligns with the strategy of interference and destabilisation of the United States of America against Nicaragua and other countries in Latin America and the Caribbean. Those who really care about Nicaragua and its people demand an end to the coercive and unilateral measures imposed by the United States of America, which are aimed at hindering Nicaragua's economic development and attaining the living conditions of the Nicaraguan people. Those who effectively care about Nicaragua and its people defend the right of the Nicaraguan people to decide their destiny, free from the manoeuvres of interference, destabilization and coup plotters fomented from abroad.

Madam President, the so-called energy market is characterised by the subordination of the interests of the peoples to those of the big energy transnationals, with dramatic consequences for their living conditions, including the worsening of inflation, leveraged by energy speculation. Regulated tariffs and maximum prices in energy products, electricity and natural gas, reduce VAT on electricity and gas and, at the same time, move towards taxing excessive or undue profits of all economic groups with energy production or trading operations, demand a structural change in the Iberian electricity market, putting an end to the marginalist rule in force, since the so-called Iberian exception has not altered this anomaly. These are some of the urgent and necessary measures that we advocate so that the energy situation does not worsen in the coming months. In the name of the market and profits, the EU prefers to keep the lid on households and micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. They either go cold and compromise their activity or empty their wallet. This is the European Union's response to rising energy prices.

Mr President, this directive under discussion today is, in our opinion, a dangerous instrument for the general stagnation of wages and, consequently, of the national minimum wage. Limiting the adequacy of wages to indicators, and to these indicators, means, on the one hand, admitting and accepting that workers earning the minimum wage are condemned to poverty and, on the other hand, making future upward developments in the minimum wage conditional on changes in the remaining wage bill. It is true that the directive does not deprive governments of the ability to set the minimum wage they deem fair and appropriate for living in dignity. But it is also true that it gives apparently technical reasons for the European Commission, the employers and their governments to try to prevent fair and dignified increases in the minimum wage in countries such as Portugal, where the government and employers' associations have rushed to say that we have already met these indicators, 60% of the gross median wage and 50% of the gross average wage. But Portuguese workers know that the minimum wage is far from adequate and that what is required is a general increase in wages and the national minimum wage.

Mr President, we have no doubt about the potential for renewal and innovation of energy networks, building stock, transport and other utilities, with a view to greater energy efficiency. However, by setting binding targets that require some states to make more efforts than others, the European Union is throwing the responsibility and financial effort needed to achieve them on top of the Member States, which is neither fair nor feasible. We argued that the funds mobilised to promote energy efficiency should be excluded from the calculation of Member States' public debt and budget deficits so that the necessary investments could be made, but our proposal was not accepted. And we argue that energy efficiency policies should not contribute to greater social exclusion and worsening living conditions for citizens, with rising housing costs, mobility or energy prices. In this sense, we believe that public control of the energy sector is crucial for increasing energy efficiency and guaranteeing the economic, social and environmental rights of peoples.

Mr President, sustainable forest management must take into account aspects such as economic profitability, the promotion of multifunctionality of forests and the sustainability of forest ecosystems. It should encourage forest planning and avoid rural abandonment, which leaves large areas of land abandoned and favours the proliferation of forest monocultures at the service of the paper industry. European Union policies and guidelines have responsibilities in the current state of our forests. Under-financing, privatisation and dismantling of public services and the domination of monopolies over the timber sector have stifled thousands of small forest producers. Protecting forests requires other policies (agriculture, rural development and trade) as well as an end to the limitations imposed on public investment by states. Timber prices are a crucial issue to ensure the interest and commitment of small and medium-sized owners in active forest management that defends the forest, promotes its multifunctionality, ensures the sustainability of forest ecosystems and fosters native species.

Mr President, there are recurrent debates about drought, extreme weather events and their impacts on various vital sectors, such as agriculture and livestock farming and other productive and economic activities. In my country, Portugal, the situation of extreme and severe drought may also have an impact on firefighting. But it seems that we are always chasing the damage and the mitigation measures, it is seen, are not enough. Prevention measures are needed that include means to strengthen water storage capacity, adaptation in productive activities, associated with the definition of water use criteria that guarantee public supply for human consumption, public health, income preservation, safeguarding means of production and the security and maintenance of water reserves. Concrete measures to increase the use and storage of water are therefore essential, and it is therefore urgent to strengthen and mobilise financial resources for the construction or reconstruction of reserves, including irrigation, which are essential for small and medium-sized agriculture and family farming and for the preservation of the rural world.

Madam President, it has been a month since English journalist Dom Phillips and Brazilian indigenist Bruno Pereira were brutally murdered in the Amazon they sought to protect. Two lives that join hundreds of other lives that in recent years have been mown down for opposing the predation of the forest and its natural resources. The devastation of Brazilian natural biomes by fire, pollution and machines, the attack on indigenous reserves and land grabbing are mechanisms used by those who make intensive agricultural production, the capture of protected species or mining their way of accumulating wealth. It is their interests that the European Union, beyond the hypocritical proclamations, supports when it insists on trade liberalisation or complicity in destabilising coup forces in Brazil and the region. It will be the Brazilian people who will change the circumstances that will allow us to preserve natural ecosystems and defend the populations that depend on them. From here we express solidarity with the Brazilian democratic and progressive forces that struggle to resume the path of social progress, the sovereign development of cooperation and peace.

Mr President, taxonomy is part of an approach that we disagree with. It is part of a process of financialization of the environment that involves, among other things, channeling significant financial flows to emerging businesses around the environment. According to the proponents of this market approach, the virtuosity of these businesses will lead to the achievement of environmental goals. The public authorities can only give the right signals to the market, it will take care of the rest. The taxonomy is intended to be that signal given to the market. The European Commission, as always, behaves as a kind of notary of economic interests, which, in this case, are even contradictory. It no longer surprises anyone, Business as Ursula. To this erroneous, counterproductive and pernicious view, we oppose another that gives centrality and protagonism to public authorities in decision-making, regulation, investments, the regulatory framework of private sector action, the definition of goals and, very importantly, in the most appropriate ways to achieve them. (End now) The problem is not just any implicit choice list, it goes far beyond it.

Mr President, the EU Action Plan and the report we are debating here are based on a premise that we cannot agree with: Calling the social sector the social economy. A political and ideological option, deliberately taken, which aims to commodify the provision of social care. The role of charities and cooperatives is undeniable. But both should not replace, but complement, the public responses of the States. The guarantee of social rights and social protection are, in our view, a responsibility of the State. The social sector must provide a quality response that is universal, close and tends to be free of charge. Workers in the social sector should be guaranteed the highest standards of labour and social rights, decent and fair pay and continuous training. Responding to the scourges and social needs cannot be a mere act of welfare, charity or philanthropy, but rather a true and genuine commitment on the part of the State to combat inequalities and the unjust distribution of wealth.

Mr President, for decades right-wing policy choices and the prevalence of deficit and debt criteria over social justice have dictated public disinvestment in the social functions of the state, the de-responsibility of the state in promoting well-being and protecting populations, and the commodification of care, both in health and education. The absence or lack of an adequate, universal and free public response in these matters has led thousands of people, mostly women, to informally and individually assume the care of close relatives, transferring to their backs all responsibility for the people they care for, subjecting themselves to a brutal physical and psychological burden and depriving them of their personal and professional life. We advocate the strengthening or creation of robust, community-based public networks, duly endowed with financial, technical, material, infrastructural and human resources, decent working conditions, career development prospects and fair wages, protection and support for informal carers with psychosocial support and social protection, training and empowerment. It is time for states to take care of carers and carers into their hands.

Madam President, following the decision of the extradition court to the United States of America and the subsequent assent of Secretary Pretty Patel last Friday, Julian Assange appealed to the Supreme Court against his extradition order. Yesterday, on the day he turned 51, the last ten years in captivity, there were expressions of solidarity all over the world, including in Lisbon, where we were, once again calling for Assange's release, denouncing and rejecting a decision aimed at imposing unacceptable pressure to condition the disclosure of information of public interest. We cannot fail to note the silence of the institutions of the European Union, in contrast to other situations on this case and the disclosure of information, among others, on the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, exposing violations of international law, including war crimes. Expressing solidarity with Julian Assange, we will continue to demand the refusal of his extradition and the annulment of the charges against Assange and his immediate release.

Madam President, the fight against poverty and social exclusion is inseparable from the eradication of the specific discriminations that affect, for the most part, women and children. To this end, specific social measures are needed as regards access to affordable housing, transport, justice and energy. We believe that the right to work is an essential condition for economic independence, the professional fulfilment of women and the realization of equal rights. To this end, we must put an end to this scourge of precariousness, which is attacking the youngest and the youngest female workers. Professions, salaries, careers and, of course, pensions must be valued. We also advocate the strengthening of public services, with a clear commitment to a universal and free national public health service, a public and democratic school that guarantees equal rights and opportunities for all and a stronger public social security system. Measures that do not fit into the neoliberal policies of the European Union, but which for us are the way to fight poverty and guarantee a better future for women today and tomorrow.

Madam President, setbacks and progress in the way societies have looked at abortion are inextricably linked to setbacks and progress in the female condition. Abortion must be seen as a public health problem and as an issue intertwined with women's fundamental rights. Women's struggle for access to sexual and reproductive rights and the dominance of their sexuality is a secular struggle that has endured persecutions that unfortunately continue to this day. The damaging effects and harmful consequences that this decision will have on the human dignity and reproductive health of American women should indignate us all, women and men, for whom the demand for participation and the taking of a position is an act of conscious citizenship in the defense of women's rights. Equality must be full, concrete, and there is no equality without rights. From here we express our solidarity with the women who feel these unacceptable setbacks, in the certainty that no right is lost forever.

Mr President, the current situation shows that security of energy supply must not be dependent on market contingencies which, as you have seen, threaten it. In the absence of public control of the sector, where market conditions are not attractive for private actors to supply the minimum levels deemed necessary for reasons of security of supply, States are called upon to pay the bill. If it is the people who pay double, on the one hand the storage targets and, on the other hand, the already high gas bills, why do they insist on this market logic? The process of privatization and liberalisation of the energy sector, which has hurt the peoples so much, is being reversed. This agreement and its urgent procedure stem from the sanctions imposed on Russia, which, it is assumed, severely affect the peoples of Europe and, if they benefit anyone, it is only the United States of America. This is also why there is a need or obligation for countries to guarantee certain levels of energy reserves, with the risk of replacing some dependencies with others and adding harmful environmental impacts.

Madam President, since 2009, we have asked the European Commission seven times about fuel price formation, more specifically about the reliability and reasonableness of a fuel pricing process, which gives a private company the power to determine fuel prices on the market. Referring at some point to ongoing cartel investigations, we wanted to know the conclusions of those investigations and the extent to which consumers were affected. The absence of concrete answers from the European Commission to evidence of collusion and cartelisation in fuel price formation raises further questions: what is the Directorate-General for Competition and the Commissioner in charge of it for? To monitor the contracts and policies of states is energetic, when the interests of multinationals are at stake it is lazy and, in the current situation, given the evidence of the opportunist and speculative exploitation of refining margins by the world's major oil companies in fixing international prices of fossil fuels, it is passive. We will continue to insist and demand answers, because it cannot be the people who pay for this market scheme.

... yes, we are internationalists but we are also defenders of the sovereignty of each people, and of each people deciding what their future will be. And what this project has shown us, also by its federalist, militarist and neoliberal matrix, what has happened, are the asymmetries of development between different states, the issue also of increasing inequalities and the issue of the prevalence of some states that dominate others. And what the unanimity rule would do was to further accentuate this trend, while not solving the problem of workers and peoples.