A metaphorical ‘journey’ inside Parliament transformed the Abreu Faro Amphitheatre, located at Técnico – Alameda campus, into a symbolic gateway to the behind-the-scenes workings of the Portuguese Parliament. The session, held on November 22, was part of the Engineering, Decision-Making, and Public Policy curricular unit, allowing Técnico students to learn about and understand the nature of decision-making in a political context, addressing the technical and strategic factors that influence it.

The session was led by Mário Amorim Lopes, a member of the Portuguese Parliament and current parliamentary leader of the Liberal Initiative, who presented the legislative working structure and the coordination between the various stakeholders in the process. Among the topics covered were the 14 sectoral committees, the distinct role of bills and draft recommendations, as well as the decision-making levels—strategic, tactical, and operational—that shape the legislative cycle.

Mário Amorim Lopes, who graduated in Computer Engineering and conducts research in the health field, used concepts familiar to Técnico students to highlight the importance of data analysis, segmentation, and historical context in strategic decision-making. He described the legislative process as “naturally slow”, noting that it involves “major social, political, and environmental implications” and requires a vision capable of “seeing all the ramifications” of each measure.

To illustrate the complexity of the process, the speaker pointed out that the Tax Code undergoes, on average, “one hundred changes per year”. He used this example as a starting point to reflect on the density of regulations and the need to adequately regulate the legislation produced.

The metaphor of the country as “a big boat” was used to emphasise the importance of building consensus and consulting institutions and sectoral representatives. “If the legislative process were too impatient, it would be impossible to account for and respond to all the laws that are in effect”, he said, also pointing out that “public policies presuppose a decision”, which is influenced by various circumstances, principles, and values. He added that ideological predictability is a crucial aspect of transparency for voters.

The discussion then shifted to the formation of political positions. According to the speaker, “political decisions will never be strictly objective”, since they are influenced by values and preferences expressed at the time of voting. “However, this dimension does not prevent the incorporation of empirical evidence, and we all make mistakes”, he said, identifying “learning from mistakes as part of public policy design” and essential to the legislative process.

The session also included an exercise in which students were challenged to formulate positions on topics under public discussion, exploring tensions between individual freedom, regulation, and social impact. Issues such as the use of religious clothing or technological regulation served to demonstrate that “there are topics that are not binary” and that require analysis with systemic understanding. The debate that followed paved the way for a final moment of synthesis, which highlighted the importance of thinking about public decision-making in an integrated and informed manner.

This curricular unit is part of the ‘Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences’, and aims to develop students’ critical thinking about how engineering and decision-support systems—including risk assessment, data analysis, decision analysis, statistical analysis, optimisation, participatory modelling, communication, and scenario planning—can improve political analysis and decision-making in a real context.