Portugal Minister’s Attack on Conservationists Risks EU Biodiversity Funds

A three-minute video, a volley of insults on social media and one of Portugal’s most sensitive public bodies—those are the ingredients of the row now pitting Agriculture Minister José Manuel Fernandes against the country’s nature-conservation community. The dispute, ignited in late January, has already spilled into Parliament, rattled environmental NGOs and raised uncomfortable questions about how far a government may go when technical opinions threaten economic projects.

Why this blows up beyond a single ministry

• Direct clash between a cabinet member and the Institute for Nature and Forest Conservation (ICNF)

• Accusations of “cowardice” and “radicalism” lobbed at public servants

• Environmental NGOs warn of a precedent that could weaken rule-of-law safeguards

• Opposition parties demand an urgent hearing in Parliament

• Potential ripple effects on EU funds tied to biodiversity targets

The video that set off the alarm bells

When José Manuel Fernandes recorded a short greeting to ICNF managers earlier this month, he expected to prod them into approving stalled rural projects. Instead, the footage leaked to the press and instantly backfired. In the clip, the minister tells officials to be more “pro-active,” asks whether “the law is well crafted” when it blocks investment, and argues that “rules can be amended.” For Portugal’s conservation scientists, those words sounded like an invitation to override environmental safeguards rather than improve them.

From policy debate to personal invective

Hours after the newspaper Público published a transcript, the minister took to X (formerly Twitter) calling the whistle-blowers “liars, cowards and radicals” and urging them to resign. The outburst breached, according to critics, the government’s own Code of Conduct (Resolution 103/2025) which obliges ministers to uphold “urbanity and inter-institutional respect.” The civic group ZERO labelled the tirade an “unprecedented attack on the dignity of conservation bodies,” while WWF Portugal judged it “gravely irresponsible.”

Parliament enters the fray

Sensing political opportunity as well as institutional risk, the Socialist Party (PS) and Bloco de Esquerda requested an immediate hearing for Fernandes in the Assembleia da República. They frame the affair as illegitimate pressure on an independent regulator, warning that future environmental opinions could be skewed if public servants fear retaliation. Government benches counter that the minister never ordered anyone to break the law but merely highlighted “room to modernise outdated norms.”

NGOs and scientists close ranks

Beyond ZERO and WWF, veteran conservationists at Quercus and a coalition of university biologists issued public statements defending the ICNF’s autonomy. They note that between 2019 and 2023 only 13 % of environmental-impact assessments were negative, evidence, they argue, that the process is not systematically hostile to development. The real danger, they say, lies in politicising science just as Brussels prepares to release new tranches of €-linked biodiversity funding under the EU Nature Restoration Law.

What is really at stake for Portugal’s countryside?

The skirmish lands at a delicate moment. Lisbon wants to speed up irrigation dams, wind farms and agro-industrial plants to unlock rural growth. Yet those same ventures often intersect with Natura 2000 sites or habitats crucial to endangered species such as the Iberian lynx. If ministerial impatience translates into lighter scrutiny, Portugal could face infringement proceedings in the European Court of Justice—jeopardising not only environmental credibility but also hundreds of millions in cohesion funds.

The road ahead

The Prime Minister has so far held back from public comment, though insiders hint that a private reprimand may be under consideration. Meanwhile, ICNF leadership is weighing whether to file a formal complaint under the public-administration statute that protects civil servants from political coercion. For residents following Portugal’s green transition, the episode is a reminder that legal certainty and ecological stewardship remain intimately linked—and that tempers flaring online can quickly echo through forests, wetlands and, ultimately, the national budget.