Portuguese presidential candidates Catarina Martins and Henrique Gouveia e Melo presented sharply contrasting visions for the country’s future in a recent debate, highlighting deep ideological divides on economic and social policy.
The candidates clashed extensively over proposed changes to Portugal’s labor code. Martins, a European Parliament member, strongly criticized government proposals, warning they could allow companies to reduce worker positions and salaries.
She argued for modifications to the labor code but not in the direction sought by the current administration.
Conversely, Gouveia e Melo, a former admiral, expressed reluctance to interfere with ongoing labor negotiations. He emphasized the importance of protecting fundamental worker rights across various contract types.
The future of the National Health Service (SNS) also saw significant disagreement. Martins called for a “pact for Health” and a “different vision” for the SNS, focusing on better care for an aging population and chronic patients.
Gouveia e Melo advocated a “more hybrid model” that integrates private medicine while ensuring the state guarantees a quality SNS. He attributed current health sector problems not to a lack of resources, but to organizational and accountability issues.
A heated exchange occurred over defense strategy and international alliances. Gouveia e Melo, who previously stated Portugal should “go die wherever necessary to defend Europe,” clarified his position by saying NATO is a defensive alliance that Portugal must respect.
He challenged Martins, accusing her of advocating for unilateral disarmament. Martins denied this, stating she never supported such a policy.
She argued that the alliance with the United States does not guarantee Europe’s security, referencing potential shifts in U.S. policy and reminding Gouveia e Melo that he had previously expressed similar concerns. Gouveia e Melo maintained his stance, asserting that “without the USA our security is very precarious.”
Both candidates agreed that the presidential power to dismiss a government, last used in 1976, should be exercised only as a last resort. Gouveia e Melo said he would only use it in extreme circumstances, such as an extremist government undermining the constitution or fundamental rights.
Martins criticized the current President’s use of these powers, suggesting it had turned the dissolution of the Assembly of the Republic into an “electoral tactical game.” She expressed hope never to have to use such a power herself.
On housing, the candidates acknowledged agreement on the severity of the problems but quickly diverged on solutions, with Gouveia e Melo stating he did not share the approach of Martins’ Left Bloc party. Martins quickly introduced herself by her full title when Gouveia e Melo referred to her past role as Left Bloc leader.
Gouveia e Melo also raised concerns about proposals he deemed “not beneficial for Democracy,” alluding to another candidate, André Ventura, whose aim to alter the presidency posed a “danger to Democracy.” Both Martins and Gouveia e Melo concurred that the judicial branch should not be subject to political conditioning, referencing recent high-profile justice cases involving former Prime Minister António Costa.
The debate marked Martins’ first appearance in the presidential election series. Gouveia e Melo opened the discussion by attacking Martins, stating, “We have an ocean of differences between us. The lady deputy has one foot here and another in Brussels,” implying a lack of focus on national issues.