Welcome to the Official page of the Presidency of the Portuguese Republic

I am very pleased to congratulate the organizers of this Seminar on “Social Economy, Employment and Local Development”. This is an extremely opportune initiative for reflection and discussion on these topics, above all on the current socioeconomic environment of our Country.

Social economy, generally known as the Third Sector, emerges between the classical dichotomies that opposed the political world from the private world of economic activity. It is not a recent or entirely new movement, but a reality that was built, throughout the years, as an alternative to the prevailing standards of modern economic development.

Simultaneously with the traditional aid providing and philanthropic congregations, the 19th century witnessed the appearance of new forms of non profit organizations of economic activity. This is the case with the cooperative movement and mutual societies, born from citizens’ initiatives faced with the State’s limited participation in the social sector. This trend asserted itself by the culture of solidarity, by the citizens’ sense for mutual aid, and became consolidated through the convergence of its purposes in line with the idea underlying social economy.

The second half of the 20th century wasn’t especially favourable towards Third Sector organizations. The development models based upon the principles of the Social State expanded in the western world, mainly in Europe. The State’s intervention perimeter was enlarged, calling upon itself an ever larger diversified number of social functions, which finally replaced the traditional functions of sovereignty.

However, the way in which the model of the Social State was developed revealed significant differences amongst the several countries. In many European States decentralized layouts were recurred to, involving the resources and the citizens’ organizations that already exercised their activity within the local communities. As such, this decentralized action contributed towards the strengthening of the basic social bonds, providing value to the experience and knowledge acquired over many decades.

In other cases, in which I include the Portuguese experience, the social model was materialized in a centralizing perspective with the direct intervention of the State’s administration, often leaving out the action of the territorially based organizations.

The services rendering infrastructure was doubled, without any efficiency gains or savings of resources. Worse still, a culture was created of social protectionism with the State as the main player, somehow freeing citizens from responsibility and disparaging the values of civic culture, participation, voluntarism and spirit of solidarity.

When, at the beginning of my first mandate, I launched the challenge of a civic compromise for social inclusion, my perspective was to resume this culture of participation, to muster the contribution of citizens and of their organizations to perform a more active role in the prevention and fight against poverty and on the devices of social exclusion.

I believed then – and still do – that a commitment is essential that involves citizens, corporations, non governmental organizations, and local communities and authorities.

These social economy players could answer needs and achieve objectives that the State is showing difficulties to supply and to attain.

They can, in addition, confer a more humanized form to the bureaucratic alternative offered by the State.

For this purpose, all they require is to become organized by targeting the muster of available resources, acting jointly to avoid waste and maximise the advantages of proximity and of the knowledge of social and neighbourhood bonds.

The issue is not to give precedence to an alternative model, but rather to promote a virtuous integration of both models, that of the welfare State and that of social economy. The issue does not consist in opting for the one or the other means, but only in the challenge placed by the reality that, together and cohesively, we can achieve better.

Throughout the last few years I’ve had the pleasure to find out that my appeal towards a civic compromise for social inclusion has been largely accepted. Today, when we are living in particularly difficult times, we can confirm that this is the greatest stake we can place to achieve the building of a more cohesive society with greater solidarity.

In the very serious social situation we find ourselves, what would be the future of thousands of Portuguese families, were it not for the exceptional work carried out by the Third Sector organizations?

What would be the future of more than two and a half million Portuguese risking poverty and social exclusion were it not for the spirit of solidarity of their fellow citizens and, allow me to so emphasize, the work of many thousands of volunteers that, together with the solidarity institutions, have brought a sign of hope and dignity to those who have seen themselves in a situation of dependency and even of misery?

Never in Portugal, since statistical records exist, have there been such high levels of unemployment such as those we have recently reached.

950 thousand unemployed, corresponding to a 17.7 per cent rate of unemployment, is a figure that few would have predicted a few years ago. Of these, 560 thousand are long standing unemployed.

Amongst the younger people, unemployment has reached 42 per cent.

Facing these numbers it is fair to question ourselves as to the social picture we have before us. We cannot resign ourselves. We cannot hide this dramatic reality.

The example provided by the civic solidarity organizations is, for us all, a reason for hope. A hope that is based on acts and not just on empty words. It is a hope that helps us plan paths for the future.

For this reason, it is only fair that I should single out and salute the study carried out by CARITAS PORTUGUESA, targeting the definition of a strategy for the promotion of employment and local development. They had the opportunity to discuss it in this Seminar and were certainly able to recognize the path that the Third Sector should tread.

With the possible increase in the poverty risk, opportunities should be identified, resources mustered, and the State’s financing efforts focused on proximity policies. But, in order that this effort achieves success, it is indispensable that we know how to cooperate in the pursuance of common objectives.

Fighting poverty does not endure media protagonism neither inconsequential volunteerism. It demands reasoning. It demands the capability to muster available resources, organization of collective actions and strictness in the applying of such resources.

Strategies to combat poverty and inequalities in income distribution must conciliate actions of social emergency with the changes in the social status of the more vulnerable.

The former are intended to resolve urgent situations, the latter are structural measures.

Immediate measures must count upon the combined action of the State with those of non governmental solidarity organizations. Structural measures will have to give preference to the recovery of the backwardness in education and in setting up an opportunity system that allows the return on the investment made by the families and by the State in the qualification of the new generations.

This is the challenge that social economy will have to face: creating more opportunities for insertion, increasing their contribution towards the production of national wealth.

Economic crises, particularly singling out that we are currently going through, are propitious to the expression of despondency and discredit. But these are also propitious occasions to, correctly and determinedly, to again find the paths of collective hope and human dignity.

We have to learn from the current crisis in order to jointly build a better Portugal, a fairer Portugal with greater freedom.

I know I can count upon your inestimable contribution so that we may live in a better Portugal.

Thank you very much.