Portugal holds third general election in three years
Hopes that the ballot might end the worst spell of political instability in decades for the European Union country of 10.6 million people could be dashed, however.
Polls suggest the election is poised to deliver yet another minority government, leaving the Portuguese back where they started.
'What the polls indicate is that there will not be major differences from the last election results,' says Marina Costa Lobo, head researcher at Lisbon University's Institute of Social Sciences.
That outcome could bring another scramble to build political alliances in Parliament, she said.
For the past 50 years two parties have dominated politics in Portugal, with the centre-right Social Democrats and the centre-left Socialist Party alternating in power. They are likely to come out on top in this ballot, too.
But public frustration with their record in government has fuelled the growth of new alternatives in recent years.
That has denied the bigger parties enough seats in Parliament to snare a majority needed to ensure they serve a full four-year term.
'I really don't know who to go for,' said Lisbon resident Patricia Fortes, 47.
'I'm fed up with the main parties, but then I feel I don't know the other parties well enough.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
14 hours ago
- The Guardian
Canada won't become the 51st US state – but could it join the EU?
Joachim Streit has never stepped foot in Canada. But that hasn't stopped the German politician from launching a tenacious, one-man campaign that he readily describes as 'aspirational': to have the North American country join the EU. 'We have to strengthen the European Union,' said Streit, who last year was elected as a member of the European parliament. 'And I think Canada – as its prime minister says – is the most European country outside of Europe.' Streit had long imagined Canada as a sort of paradise, home to dense forests that course with wide, rushing rivers. But after Donald Trump returned to power, launching much of the world into a trade war and turning his back on America's traditional allies, Streit began to cast the northern country in a new light. What he saw was a relatively unexplored relationship, one that could prove mutually beneficial as the world grapples with rapidly reshaping global dynamics. 'Canadians have seen their trust in the US undermined, just as we have in Europe, following President Trump's actions,' he said. 'We need to strengthen the ties that bind us to our friends.' While he admitted that the possibility of Canada as a full member of the EU 'may be aspirational for now', he wondered if it was an idea whose time had come. 'Canada would be a strong member,' he said. 'If Canada would be a member of the EU, it would rank 4th in terms of GDP. It's part of Nato. And 58% of (working-age) Canadians have college degrees.' Canada also has vast energy reserves – an asset that could prove useful to the bloc, which is still struggling to wean itself off Russian gas, he added. Since launching his campaign last month, Streit has become the most visible proponent of an unlikely proposition that has been gaining traction since Trump began floating the idea of Canada as the 51st state. In late January, a former foreign minister of Germany, Sigmar Gabriel, called for Canada to be invited into the EU. 'They are more European than some European member states anyway,' he told Germany's Pioneer Media. Media outlets on both sides of the Atlantic have delved into the idea, while a February poll of 1,500 Canadians found 44% of them believed Canada should look into joining the EU. In March, however, a European spokesperson appeared to pour cold water on the suggestion, citing an article in the EU treaty that specifies only European states can apply to join the EU. Streit brushed off the technicality, pointing to France's overseas territories. 'Those are also not in Europe, but those islands belong to the European Union,' he said. Cyprus, considered EU territory but located geographically in west Asia, was another example. And if one wanted to get technical, Canada was – albeit in a minuscule way – connected geographically to Europe, he said. 'Greenland, which belongs to Denmark, shares a border with Canada,' he said, pointing to the divide that runs through the uninhabited half-mile square Hans Island. In April, Streit submitted a written question to the European parliament, asking whether the treaty article stipulating that states must be European could be interpreted in a way that could allow for Canadian membership or, barring that, if it could be legally revised. He has yet to receive a response. Undaunted, he sent a letter to two EU commissioners calling for a sort of political Erasmus to be launched between the bloc and Canada. What he envisions is a professional exchange programme that would allow EU officials to better grasp the nuances of Canadian federalism and Canadians to get a sense of the workings of European institutions. 'It would serve as both a symbolic and practical step toward deeper integration,' he said, one that could build on existing ties such as the EU-Canada trade deal and Canada's participation in the EU's flagship science research programme, Horizon. Since launching the campaign, he's been in constant contact with Canadians; meeting twice with one of Canada's high-ranking envoys to the EU and meeting with a Brussels-based association that promotes Canada-EU trade. As news spreads of his efforts, his office has received a handful of emails of support. Some have offered up their own thoughts on how to skirt around Canada's geographic location; one recent email laid out what the writer described as a 'killer argument', pointing out that as part of the Commonwealth Canada was tied to the UK and, by extension, Europe. Streit took it one step further. 'And who is the head of Canada?' he asked, pointing to King Charles. 'And he's a European.' Streit said he was well aware that, for all his efforts, the idea may prove to be impossible. Even so, he hoped that the moment could be seized on to at least hammer out the kind of deep ties the bloc has with countries such as Norway or Switzerland. 'Sometimes in history, the windows of opportunity open and close again,' he said. 'And sometimes, the windows of opportunity are open only for a brief moment.'
The Independent
2 days ago
- The Independent
Global aid cuts are a massive wake-up call. It's time to give Africa a bigger voice
In less than a month, Seville will host the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development in a climate of uncertainty following the abrupt decision by the US to dismantle its aid programmes. But Washington is not alone in this posture. The European Union agreed to reallocate €2 billion (£1.7bn) reallocation from development budgets in February 2024 —and many individual European countries have made cuts to their aid budget. It is a clear signal that the landscape of Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) is shifting. For Africa, this isn't just a reshuffle, it is a wake-up call for deep reflection and action: will we adapt, or will aid simply become a relic of the past? The timing is bad, the rationale questionable, and the ripple effects threaten to impact the lives and health of millions depending on aid programmes. Let's be honest: aid has had a mixed impact. The spectrum of aid's legacy in Africa, including my country, Guinea, runs from positive to disastrous. On the positive side, aid has contributed to infrastructure development – I'm thinking for instance about a project in northwest Guinea to replace an old ferry with a new road and bridge. During a visit, a cunning minister of public works convinced a skeptical partner to go on a very 'special' field trip via the old route, one that left a senior official so sore and tired that all doubters saw the project's true necessity. Once it was completed, traffic soared, proof that aid can work when it's aligned with real needs. But aid can fall flat. When I was serving as minister of finance, I led efforts to curb directly awarded contracts and boost transparency following an audit of public procurement procedures. The goal was to improve the quality and cost-effectiveness of public spending. But some donors were not willing to support this effort. I deplored one particular partner's failure to listen and, above all, a stubborn insistence on taking us backwards by ignoring our analysis. I said no to the help on offer. It was hard but necessary. Aid must serve the real priorities, not satisfy bureaucratic checkboxes. In a recent discussion with the director of an incubator to help small and medium-sized businesses grow – funded by a government donor – I was struck by the emergence of shortcomings I thought belonged to the past. These included a laziness to question one's own model for delivering results, despite warnings about the risks of inefficiency. We also see a narrow focus on so-called "easily accessible" geographic areas, such as capitals, and on disbursements. Aid, in many cases, has helped sustain corrupt elites or fostered unhealthy alliances with public administrations – perpetuating dependency rather than solving problems. When I look back on my own experience in development – a journey close to an out-of-body experience for an African – I realise we are at a critical juncture. It's the moment to question the very foundations of aid institutions inherited from the post-colonial era. Despite some positive reforms, such as untying aid, the core premise remains unequal. It is predominantly driven by the donors, with African countries still being passive recipients rather than active partners. How can this be changed? Change starts with listening. The 'receiving hand' is not dumb and has ideas. It knows its needs. Recipient countries, especially in Africa, must be at the centre of the discussions. Conversations largely driven by donors are a recipe for failure. Furthermore, African organisations and think-tanks must be active players. Decolonising aid must be more than just a buzzword. We are making progress, but it must be accelerated. We continue to see consultancies denied opportunities due to insufficient financial strength – despite their thorough knowledge of the field. It also means better coordination between donors. You would think this is obvious, and yet despite witnessing many innovative and pragmatic approaches, I still see some partners continue to burden governments' limited capacities by each imposing their own distinct systems and reporting requirements. This ends up being a distraction. Recipient governments are key and are the only ones who should replace any donor. I believe the cuts could be an opportunity to make fiscal compromises that (finally) prioritise the necessary and the productive over the superfluous and the personal gain of some actors. Aid must be used strategically and selectively. It should foster technical cooperation for Africa's economic transformation, its integration higher in global value chains. Aid should be a catalyst to reform the global financial architecture by leveraging innovation and the capital needed to finance our massive infrastructure programmes. It must be an instrument for the Africa Union's theme of the year: "Justice for Africans and People of African Descent Through Reparations'. It's time to make sure those people are at the table, and their voices are listened to.
Reuters
2 days ago
- Reuters
EU open to lowering tariffs on US fertilisers in trade talks
BRUSSELS, June 6 (Reuters) - The European Union is open to lowering tariffs on U.S. fertiliser imports as an offer in trade talks with the Trump administration, but will not weaken its food safety standards in pursuit of a deal, EU agriculture commissioner Christophe Hansen told Reuters. "That is definitely an option," Hansen said, of reducing U.S. fertiliser tariffs. "That will be on the table. And I think that would be a huge way forward, and an offer as well to the U.S.," he said in an interview with Reuters on Thursday, adding that whether that would mean zero tariffs, or a reduction of current rates, would need to be negotiated. U.S. exports face the EU's standard tariffs of 5.5% on imports of ammonia, and 6.5% on nitrogen fertilisers, as well as an extra 29.48 euro-per-tonne anti-dumping duty on U.S. urea ammonium nitrate (UAN). UAN comprised around three quarters of EU imports of U.S. fertilisers last year, EU trade data shows. Reducing tariffs could boost Europe's purchases of U.S. fertiliser, to fill a gap as the EU cuts supplies from Russia. Around 24% of the EU's nitrogen fertiliser imports came from Russia in 2023, while the U.S. accounted for 8%, EU data shows. "I believe most of the Europeans would prefer buying fertilizers from the U.S. than from Russia," Hansen said. The EU will hit nitrogen-based fertilisers from Russia with tariffs rising to 100% over three years, a level that would effectively halt annual trade flows currently worth 1.3 billion euros ($1.5 billion). Hansen said the EU was also open to discussing increasing its purchases of hormone-free beef from the U.S., and a deal to have zero-for-zero tariffs on EU and U.S. wines. But he said the bloc would not compromise on its stringent food safety standards as it seeks a deal. "I don't see room for manoeuvre to roll back our high quality standards. But of course, on other points, on other products, we are very open to negotiations," Hansen said.
