World

Hugo Soares calls Chega's motion "ridiculous"

PSD parliamentary leader Hugo Soares criticized Chega's motion of censure as ridiculous and addressed other related topics.

3 September 2026Tagblick Newsdesk

AI-generatedWritten by an AI system, editorially responsible — how we work

Archive photo: Hugo Soares calls Chega's motion "ridiculous" — Archive photoPhoto: Senado Federal · Flickr · BY

Hugo Soares, parliamentary leader of the PSD, described the censure motion put forward by Chega as "ridiculous." During his address, Soares remarked that this initiative is yet another example of what he considers the political "silly season," a time when political activity becomes less serious and is filled with controversial episodes.

Additionally, Soares pointed out the disrespect that, according to him, Chega showed for Parliament's time with this motion. This criticism was accompanied by a defense of Luís Neves, whom Soares indicated he supports.

In the same context, Soares expressed confidence in Rui Montenegro, the current leader of the PSD, and in how he will navigate the current political dynamics.

During his speech, Soares also revealed that he voted for António José Seguro in the last presidential elections, a fact that, while personal, became public amid the political discussion.

On the other hand, Soares stated that he does not believe the President of the Republic sends "messages through friends" to the Government, referring to potential links or influences that he feels should not occur.

Hugo Soares' stance and his statements regarding Chega's censure motion highlight the PSD's position in relation to other political forces in Parliament, indicating a clear line of criticism towards Chega's initiatives.

This item was written by an AI system on the basis of the headlines and short teasers of the independently operating newsrooms named below. We disclose this under Art. 50(4), second subparagraph, of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act). Before publication we check origin and verifiability — anything that appears in only one place is not published — as well as language, substance and legally sensitive content. No separate substantive review of each individual item by a natural person takes place; we therefore do not rely on the exemption in Art. 50(4), second subparagraph, of the AI Act. Editorial responsibility for this publication rests with the person named in the imprint (§ 18 Abs. 2 MStV). Please report errors to [email protected] — we will correct or remove the item. Full reports are available from the sources listed.