Radicals do not recognize the right to housing

The campaign of misinformation around the changes in the legal regime of Territorial Management Instruments (RJIGT), publicly known as the new soil law, assumed contours close to the absurd, promoting a smoke curtain that treats the community as if it were collectively dull.

Opponents of legal changes began by stating that they would violate REN (National Ecological Network) and RAN (National Agricultural Network). In fact, this has never been concerned. What the changes are intended is to allow them to be disaffected, for housing construction (70% public, 30% private), rustic soils that are not classified as REN or that have no high agricultural potential.

Subsequently, the argument of terror was used: here del-rei that, allowing them to be the municipal agencies (City Council and Municipal Assembly) to promote these disaffection, 'here comes corruption'. This argument was not tragic, it would even be fun, determining that employees of the Joint Regional Development Commissions (CCDR) are more serious than the technicians of the municipalities that analyze the council territory. They are also more serious than those elected by the people. Are CCDR technicians made from any human mass different from the technicians of the municipalities? Or did CCDR technicians study in different schools?

You will know who proposes these things that the CCDR administrations are made up of political paintings, most of them former collections, which were named for this purpose? Are these political frameworks, when changing the chair, from municipal buildings to CCDR, 'anointed and blessed' to achieve any other stage of human evolution?

Finally, adding to the previous argument, the seriousness of the political agents who promoted legal changes. Even in the case of the former Secretary of State for the local administration, who created his company after being appointed to the case, nothing indicated that the real estate promotion was in its purpose in rustic soils, to disaffection under these legal changes.

The case of the prime minister is, as regards the concrete, particularly illogical issue. The head of the government had, for a few years, a family business, with the possibility of intervening in various sectors of activity, which he did. What does this have to do with the changes in discussion? Nothing! But it served to intimidate and inquire the debate, as happened.

In fact, underlying all this, are the prejudices and ideology of the extremists and the ignorant. Everything serves to prevent building for housing, at a time when the Portuguese are so needy of it.

I know in my nearby circle dozens of people who need a house they can pay. It does not have. Contact, daily, due to the duty of office, with people in despair for lack of home. They will not have a home in the short term. It will no longer be possible.

Metropolitan areas are full of people who have nowhere to go. The capital already has zones of tents under viaducts, luxury housing walls, much of it sold to more than 10,000 euros the square meter of construction. Doesn't this be ashamed most Portuguese politicians? Don't you touch them? I should, but it doesn't. I don't know who are serving, but it's not the people. Sitting, in the comfort of their home, they believe that 'pepper in the other's eye is refreshment'.

Do you believe, the current generation of politicians is possible to maintain this regime while condemning thousands of Portuguese to live miserably? It won't be. A democracy does not create miserable, protects the people from misery.