Portugal’s parliament on Thursday, February 26, 2026, debated proposals to revise pension benefits for military personnel and police officers, exposing deep divisions among political parties over how to address perceived inequities in the system. The debate centers on ensuring fair retirement income for those who have served in the armed forces, the National Republican Guard (GNR), and other security forces.
Communist Party (PCP) parliamentarian Paula Santos argued that merging the public sector social security regime with the general Social Security system has been “extremely prejudicial and penalizing” for military and security personnel, creating different calculation formulas. She explained that those who enrolled in the Caixa Geral de Aposentações before August 1993 typically receive a pension around 90% of their last salary, while those who enrolled after 2006 receive only about 40%.
The PCP’s proposal seeks to increase pension supplements to ensure that retirement benefits equal 90% of pre-retirement earnings. However, the proposal, along with a similar one from the Chega party, was rejected by the Social Democratic Party (PSD) and the Socialist Party (PS).
PSD leader Joaquim Barbosa criticized the proposals as “populist” and accused the PCP and Chega of being united only in their “bad preparation of the proposals and their foundations, the creation of inequalities, and their impacts on public accounts.” He argued that the existing system already safeguards the specific needs of military and paramilitary forces through a military condition subsidy and earlier access to retirement.
PS parliamentarian Patrícia Faro acknowledged the unique circumstances of military service but cautioned against actions that could compromise the principles of equity and justice within the pension system. She stated a willingness to “mitigate impacts and ensure the correction of possible inequities,” but emphasized the necessitate to maintain fairness.
André Ventura, president of the Chega party, framed the issue as one of “dignity,” expressing agreement with the PCP’s concerns. However, he pointed out that the current proposals target a 2017 decree, a measure the PCP had previously supported as part of a governing coalition with the PS – a period referred to as the “geringonça.”
The debate also saw criticism from other parties. Fabian Figueiredo of the Left Block (BE) reminded lawmakers that the center-right Social Democrat prime minister Pedro Passos Coelho had “cut pensions of former police officers and military personnel” during the period of the “troika” – the international bailout program following the 2008 financial crisis. Marta Patrícia Silva of the Liberal Initiative (IL) acknowledged the current model is unfair but warned of a “deep transformation” and accused Chega and PCP of exploiting vulnerable individuals.
João Almeida of the CDS-PP noted that the decree in question dates back to 2005, when José Sócrates of the PS was prime minister and António Costa was the Minister of Internal Administration, acknowledging an existing inequality but deeming the current proposals inadequate. The Livre, PAN, and JPP parties expressed support for the proposals.
The outcome of the debate underscores the ongoing challenges in balancing the need to provide adequate retirement security for military and security personnel with broader concerns about fiscal responsibility and fairness within the Portuguese pension system.
Madeira: PSD and CDS with protest vote over Hugo Soares’ statements
