Mariana Vieira da Silva, former Minister for the Presidency with oversight of European funds, criticized in an interview with ECO the lack of transparency in the way the Recovery and Resilience Plan was reprogrammed by Luís Montenegro's executive. The former minister warned that there are investments that will not be completed within the deadline and that the government has been pushing solutions to Portugal 2030, which represents a problem at least in Lisbon and the Algarve. She argued that clear answers are lacking for important projects whose institutions, such as municipal councils or IPSS, do not have the financial availability to complete them.
Vieira da Silva made two criticisms of the reprogramming: not the number of reprogrammings, which any government would approve, but rather the very closed manner in which it was done, without adequate public debate. She pointed out that the creation of the IFIC fund at Banco de Fomento should have been subject to public discussion, questioning why there was greater openness for the private sector and business investments than for other types of investment, such as schools, health centers, student residences and IPSS.
The former minister made a positive assessment of the RRP, identifying three dimensions that changed the country: the EU's joint response to the pandemic crisis, the innovative affordable housing program (the largest in the entire EU in proportion) and the new policy of support for companies through mobilizing agendas. She highlighted that it is impossible to travel around the country without finding works resulting from the RRP and that it brought improvements in areas such as continuing care, mental health and home support.
Vieira da Silva expressed concern about the way the country will maintain public investment levels after the end of the RRP and urged the government to clarify whether the State Budget for 2027 includes funds to guarantee the continuity of the projects that fell out of the plan. She noted that Portugal does not have a history of discontinuity in this type of investment, except during the troika period, and that there are no signs of unwillingness from the Socialist Party to enable this type of decision.
