Portuguese far-right leader taken to hospital after second collapse
The leader of Portugal's far-right Chega party has been taken to hospital after another collapse during a rally days before the country votes in its third snap election since 2022.
André Ventura, whose brash, blunt leadership style has helped make the populist, anti-immigration party Portugal's third biggest political force, was taken ill at an event in the southern town of Odemira on Thursday, two days after a similar episode.
Videos from the rally showed Ventura, 42, grabbing his chest and trying to undo his tie before falling into the arms of aides who carried him away. He was taken to a local clinic and then transferred to a hospital in Setúbal, near Lisbon, to undergo a medical procedure.
Ventura had been discharged from hospital in Faro on Wednesday after his previous collapse. The hospital said he had had an oesophageal spasm caused by gastric reflux and high blood pressure.
The Chega MP Marta Silva told CNN Portugal on Thursday that an electrocardiogram in an ambulance immediately after the second collapse had shown that 'everything is well with his heart' and that it was probably another spasm.
Ventura posted a picture of himself giving a thumbs-up sign from a hospital bed on Thursday afternoon. 'This is a setback and a difficulty,' he wrote on X. 'It won't bring us down. Keep going … keep going!!! Portugal is much more important, it is this country that moves us.'
Chega looks likely to once again finish third on Sunday, behind the ruling, centre-right Democratic Alliance (AD) and the Socialist party (PS). Recent polls put the AD on about 33%, the PS on 26% and Chega on 17%.
Ventura's efforts to win a place in government have been rebuffed by Portugal's prime minister, Luís Montenegro, who has repeatedly ruled out any deal with the far-right party.
Chega, which has campaigned on a promise to clean up Portuguese politics at the same time as increasing its rhetoric against the Roma population, has been hit by a series of damaging allegations relating to some of its members over recent months.
Sign up to Headlines Europe
A digest of the morning's main headlines from the Europe edition emailed direct to you every week day
after newsletter promotion
In January, Chega expelled one of its MPs from the party after he was accused of stealing suitcases at several airports. Another party member was caught drink-driving the same month, while a third has been charged with paying for oral sex with an underage male, who was 15 at the time.
Reuters contributed to this report
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Inside Mary Lou McDonald's plan to shake up Sinn Fein
Without a doubt, last year was something of an annus horribilis for Mary Lou McDonald, the Sinn Fein leader. The early omens were not good: February polling showed a surprising six-point drop in support as her party came under pressure over its stance on immigration. In the summer, McDonald's strategy to field a record 335 candidates in the local elections fell apart spectacularly. It was a disastrous day out, given that Sinn Fein took under 12 per cent of the national vote and more than 230 unsuccessful candidates were left picking up the pieces. For the first time, grassroots members of Sinn Fein began muttering about McDonald's future in charge of the party. With five months until a general election, the pressure on the leader was intense. At the same time, she was dealing with huge personal upheaval. Having recovered from a hysterectomy, McDonald and her family took a trip to Biarritz. In the airport in France, her husband, Martin Lanigan, became seriously ill. He later underwent surgery and was diagnosed with colorectal cancer. Then her father, Patrick, with whom she had a complicated relationship, died last summer. In October, a series of scandals rocked Sinn Fein, right as the country was on the precipice of a general election. A 'complete overhaul' of the party's governance structure was ordered by McDonald, and The Sunday Times can now reveal the outcome of those reviews and the new rules which TDs, senators and staff members will have to follow. The first big controversy last October came when it emerged that two press officers had given job references for a former colleague under investigation for child sex offences, for which he was later jailed. Seán Mag Uidhir, a well-known Sinn Fein figure who headed the party's media operation in the north, and his colleague Caolán McGinley left Sinn Fein when it emerged that they provided references for Michael McMonagle. McDonald said that McMonagle was immediately suspended when he was questioned by the PSNI about the allegations in 2021, and yet the following year, his two co-workers provided the references. As part of the 'complete overhaul' of governance, a review of human resources practices took place. An internal memo has been given to party members which lays out new rules. From now on, all requests for job references for staff who work or once worked for Sinn Fein need to be referred to the party's HR manager. Members and staff have been told they shouldn't give any references at all. If clearance is given by HR for former and current employees, only brief factual references should be provided, confirming only the person's start and finish date and their job title. References should not mention the person's character or ability, and line managers are now the only people authorised to provide these references. Furthermore, references should also not be given for elected representatives or activists, except in exceptional circumstances that must be approved by Sam Baker, the party's general secretary. Not everyone in the party is a fan of the rules, which are laid out in a private memo, but the new diktat will remain in place. Another huge issue that arose last October came with the shock resignation of the Laois TD Brian Stanley. After he left, he described an inquiry into a complaint made against him as 'seriously flawed'. A Sinn Fein draft report into a complaint made against Stanley came to the opinion that his conduct in an incident constituted 'sexual harassment', something he strongly denied. The internal inquiry into the complaint dragged on from late July of last year until early October, with claims and counter-claims being made. The second big piece of work as part of the overhaul was to look at how Sinn Fein disciplines its members. Barry Mulqueen, a Belfast barrister, undertook an in-depth review, looking at how the disciplinary committee had handled complaints to date. He was due to supply a report to Sinn Fein at the end of May. Sources say that what has emerged is that the party's disciplinary processes are not fit for purpose. Issues that are likely to be addressed will be the structure of internal inquiries, who carries them out and, crucially, the amount of time an inquiry takes. There is a view that complaints drag on for far too long, and that a structure needs to be put around the 'back and forth' nature of serious complaints. The third serious blow for Sinn Fein last year was the controversy over a former senator who was secretly suspended and later resigned from the party over inappropriate messages sent to a teenager. Niall Ó Donnghaile, a former Belfast lord mayor, was suspended by Sinn Fein over the issue but the party let him resign on health grounds without revealing the complaint against him. The teenager in question then said McDonald's tribute to Ó Donnghaile was 'like a mental stab'. At the time, she issued a statement thanking him for his service to the party, something she later apologised for. On foot of all of this, Gareth McGibbon, a registered social worker, has completed a new draft of the party's child protection policy. A source said that a part of this work involved making sure that everyone in Sinn Fein knew exactly what steps to take, and how to conduct themselves, if a matter of concern involving a minor arose. There has also been work done to make sure the policies are aligned north and south. All of these revelations, and the resulting follow-up questions, emerged for Sinn Fein in a drip-feed manner that created a huge sense of dread, especially as the country was on the verge of a general election. One party member described the period as the party being 'in a death spiral'. Although Sinn Fein painted the results of the election as a triumph, it failed to replicate its quota-smashing performance of 2020, and ultimately failed to cross the threshold into Government Buildings. Since then, the results of the election have been studied carefully by strategists. Sinn Fein is ultra-secretive by nature and prefers to keep a tight lid on what is happening behind the scenes. However, The Sunday Times spoke to sources at all levels of the party to get a detailed insight into the mood within the camp. Sinn Fein's decision to present a united front with the rest of the 'combined opposition' of Labour, the Social Democrats, People Before Profit and others has gone down well with supporters, who feel voters might, in future, buy into the idea of a government made up of a left-wing bloc. 'Grassroots members are happy with this strategy, and with Mary Lou being front and centre of that. It was good red meat,' a local party member said. Close observers of Sinn Fein's daily attacks during leaders' questions may also have noticed a subtle shift. While TDs spent the five years leading up to last November's general election presenting the public with credible alternative policies, this time the plan of action is attack, attack, attack. There was, a source said, 'a certain amount of preparing for government that went on in recent years but now we are sticking to the principles of equality for the working class. It is going back to our roots on issues like neutrality, housing and health and disability services.' Away from the Dail chamber, the party is refocusing itself on its bread-and-butter issues. 'We are in a period of regrowth,' the insider said. 'Our focus from an activism and membership point of view is unity and the unity message. There is a big, big push now to focus on unity in messaging, for discussion and in terms of organising events. Party members have been asked to coalesce around this again.' Another criticism of Sinn Fein made after last year's elections came from John Hearne, the respected Waterford councillor. He said the party was being run by 'armchair generals'. Sinn Fein is actively trying to re-engage its membership base, and the decision-making process around the presidential campaign has been a case in point. 'There has been an interesting shift in attitude from the hierarchy,' a party source said. 'Every member was asked to consider making a submission to the party or through the structures to give their thoughts based on four scenarios.' The first option was Sinn Fein running its own candidate; the second was Sinn Fein promoting and backing a candidate with the united left; the third was giving tacit support to that candidate on the left; the fourth involved the party sitting it out on the sidelines. Some of the feedback so far has indicated strong support for option two: fully backing a candidate of the left. One decision from the top that has not gone down quite so well is the decision to cancel the ard fheis this year, and hold an annual conference in April 2026, which will happen in Belfast. The party cited 'logistical and strategic challenges' and said it was 'increasingly difficult' to find a suitable venue for the autumn and 'particularly one large enough to accommodate our growing attendance'. Party members who spoke to The Sunday Times said they were not consulted about this decision and they also said they had doubts about the reasons given for putting it off. A source with knowledge of the decision said it was taken because the party simply would not get enough media attention for an ard fheis when a presidential election is happening and a budget was being announced, particularly on TV shows. There are other pressing decisions to be made, however — decisions which may yet divide the party. On Saturday, July 5, in Dublin, selected party members will gather for a special conference on gender policy. It comes after Sinn Fein was banned from taking part in a trans Pride march in Dublin next month over its stance on rights for transgender people, despite meetings with LGBT+ groups. These groups want Sinn Fein to clarify its stance on puberty blockers in Northern Ireland, but also on the UK Supreme Court ruling on sex, gender and equality. David Cullinane, the Sinn Fein health spokesman, was 'rapped on the knuckles' by the party leadership after he posted on X that a Supreme Court ruling defining women by their biological sex was a 'common sense judgment'. He later deleted the message and apologised. The issue is particularly sensitive for McDonald given that she has a trans woman for a sibling. More liberal members within Sinn Fein are pushing for clear change and more conservative members are urging the party 'not to get involved', as one person put it, adding: 'It is not coming up on the ground.' Beyond this, members around the country are reporting that Sinn Fein remains under serious local pressure on immigration. 'We are still bruised from last year. Misinformation continues to fly across social media,' one said. There is a push among the membership for Sinn Fein to formulate a very clear and accessible immigration policy, but the sense is that, like many of the party's big plans, this is some way off in the future.
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
The TV star who tried to play politics just walked into a trap: PVO goes inside Basil Zempilas' bunker to reveal the brutal truths his Perth cheer squad won't want to hear
The toughest job in politics Ambition can be a powerful motivator in politics, but when it outruns capability or misreads opportunity, it can quickly become a liability.
The Independent
5 hours ago
- The Independent
Keir Starmer accidentally admits his first year has been a failure
It is the sort of thing a backbencher who is trying to be loyal would say. Which is damning, and particularly so from the prime minister himself, because a core part of his job is communicating the government's 'story'. He was asked in Canada on Wednesday what his biggest mistake had been in his first year in government. 'We haven't always told our story as well as we should,' he said. Most politicians would have bristled at the obvious trap laid by Beth Rigby of Sky News, but Keir Starmer is a surprisingly low-ego politician. No other British prime minister would have bent down to pick up the trade deal papers that Donald Trump dropped. Most other prime ministers would have ignored Rigby's invitation to criticise themselves, especially as the second half of a two-part question, but Starmer came back to it willingly after answering the first part (what are you most proud of? 'Three million extra appointments in the NHS'). He is not self-important, which I admire about him, but he is ruthless and confident. Confident enough not to notice or care that the photographers are recording him scrabbling at the president's feet, and confident enough to give a serious answer to an obviously silly question. Unfortunately for him, it was a bad answer. Communication is not an optional add-on to democratic politics; it is the essence of it. Poor communication is usually an excuse not an explanation. It is the code to be used when a government becomes unpopular but people do not want to imply that the leader is the problem. Poor communications and bad advisers get the blame. It was ever thus: when parliament criticised Charles I's advisers; when Margaret Thatcher was told to get rid of Alan Walters, her economic adviser. Charles I was urged to get his message across better to MPs by denouncing popery; Thatcher was urged to sell the poll tax better by calling it the community charge. In both cases, it wasn't the advisers or the communications that were the problem. So it is with Starmer. MPs grumble about Morgan McSweeney, the prime minister's chief of staff. They blame him for the 'right-wing' policies that they don't like. They have all read Get In, the book about how Labour won the election by Patrick Maguire and Gabriel Pogrund, which portrays McSweeney as the mastermind and strategic genius behind a campaign for which Starmer is often the passive figurehead. This is often developed, by MPs who 'didn't come into politics to cut support for the disabled', into a fairytale in which Starmer, a proper socialist who shares Ed Miliband's politics (like them), has been taken prisoner by his Blairite chief of staff. If that is an attempt to avoid direct criticism of their leader, it fails, because it makes him look weak and dishonest. But it is also wrong. In the end, the leader always takes responsibility for decisions. Nor is Starmer simply McSweeney's puppet. A telling report in the Financial Times on Wednesday revealed that the plan to treat Nigel Farage even more publicly as the real leader of the opposition came from Starmer himself, and not McSweeney: it was the prime minister's idea to travel to St Helens to deliver a speech as a direct response to Farage's pitch for Labour votes. Farage is the main threat to Labour at the next election, but it may be that McSweeney has doubts about the prime minister himself saying so in public. The 'poor communications' line is just as bad – and it is a defence that Starmer deploys himself. What does he mean when he says 'we' could have 'explained our decisions in the way that might in retrospect have been better'? Could he have said to pensioners on modest incomes, 'We're going to take away your winter fuel payment, but don't worry, next year we will pretend that the economy is getting better and give it back to you'? The reason his government's decisions have not been explained better is that they were bad decisions. In retrospect, as he put it, he should have stopped Rachel Reeves cutting the winter fuel payment. Looking back, he shouldn't have promised to ' smash the gangs ' with no idea how to do it. Looking further back, he should have put someone with his full authority in charge of preparing for government. These are not examples of failing to tell the government's story 'as well as we should': they reveal a government with no story to tell, or even, quite often, with the wrong story to tell. Starmer has shown that he can learn, and he seems to have no fear of U-turning from the wrong policy to the right one. So maybe he can recover from the false start of his first year – but it will be achieved by making better decisions, not by 'telling a better story'.
