The changes in Higher Education that the PSD/CDS government is promoting, with the support of Chega, PS, and IL, aimed at the increasing commodification of Public Higher Education, within the framework of a broader offensive to privatise the social functions of the State, have concrete effects.

For example, consider the recent change made to the regulations for access and admission to Higher Education for the coming academic year, which restricts access for students with specific educational needs to the special quota for candidates with disabilities.

Another significant change was in the Legal Regime of Higher Education Institutions (RJIES). In 2007, during the discussion of the PS bill that established the RJIES, the PCP stated that this law would be seriously detrimental to Higher Education and to the Country, because this regime was unnecessary and did not constitute a solution to the main problem of public Higher Education: public disinvestment.

The reality is that the RJIES introduced profound and negative neoliberal transformations into the Portuguese Higher Education system, attacking its public and democratic character. It introduced the corporatisation and privatisation of public Higher Education, limiting the autonomy of institutions, and restricted the democratic and participatory management of institutions foreseen by the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic.

The government's proposed law, approved by the Assembly of the Republic but not yet promulgated, maintains the political choices of the original text and preserves the various problems that this regime brought to Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), while also leaving room for further changes.

Contrary to what is required—a single system encompassing Universities and Polytechnics—the approved law establishes a flexible system, heightening the ambiguities of the binary system, which is substantially distorted and does not keep pace with the evolution observed in Higher Education and Research. It exacerbates the imbalance between inland and coastal regions, with the inherent intensification of unequal opportunities for the youth from different regions and social strata.

In terms of democratic management and participation, the problems pointed out by the PCP remain. Despite the inclusion of technical, specialist, and management staff in the electoral universe of the general councils, the presence of external figures with interests unrelated to the institutions persists. The election of the rector becomes direct, but integrates former students into the electoral universe, with a greater voting weight than that of this personnel and equivalent to that of students.

The PCP also notes that the Government's proposed law, in a context of widespread precarious employment in Higher Education Institutions, excludes teachers and researchers with precarious contracts from the possibility of electing and being elected to these management and governing bodies, which constitutes a deliberate withdrawal of rights from these workers.

Another problem that should have been resolved in this RJIES is the foundational regime, which, according to the PCP, paved the way for the privatisation and commodification of public institutions. This amendment does not question this path, confirming the option chosen by the PSD, CDS, Chega, PS, and IL to maintain this model and absolve the State of responsibility for Higher Education, with all the consequences that follow.

With the approval of this proposal, the identified problems are compounded by, among others, the possibility of national accreditation agencies from EU member states being able to accredit the operation or revoke study cycles, or the maintenance and strengthening of the functions of the student ombudsman and the possibility of creating an institutional ombudsman – solutions that devalue and call into question the role of student associations and also the workers' representatives themselves.

The approval of the new RJIES is even more serious insofar as an alteration to the Legal Regime of Degrees and Diplomas is on the table. The PCP does not disagree with the need to revise this legislation, but believes that revisions should promote the democratisation of access to knowledge, the opposite path that this Government is taking. What is known about the changes points to an intention to create barriers to access to Higher Education, namely the imposition of additional requirements based on international criteria for literacy and numeracy levels, such as proficiency in the English language, devaluing the training acquired in national Secondary Education and without guaranteeing this learning beforehand.

In the case of access to master's and doctoral degrees, not only are the aforementioned criteria required, but a very grievous requirement is added: the percentile requirement of the grades obtained in previous courses. That is, in the case of master's degrees, it is suggested that only students ranked among the top 35% in their respective undergraduate degrees be admitted, limiting access to this level of education to 65%. In the case of doctoral degrees, it is proposed to limit access to the top 25%, with the Government denying access to doctoral degrees to 75% of students, all regardless of the number of course places available.

In both cases, there is no mention of how these processes will be implemented, creating even more arbitrariness, as pointed out by the National Education Council in Opinion No. 3/2026, of May 21.

An amendment to the Social Action System is also underway. While the specific changes that would allow for a comprehensive evaluation are not yet known, what is known is worrying. At the outset, it is noticeable that there is a deepening of the path towards liberalisation, commodification, and privatisation of social action services.

The proposed decree-law approved by the Council of Ministers on May 21 introduces a profound change in the conception of what Social Action is and what it is for, clearly extending it to all higher education, both public and private, distorting its principles and introducing a "student support" policy that promotes the expansion of existing concessions. In other words, in addition to bars and cafeterias (whose concessions are already reflected in the insufficient supply of social meals and exorbitant prices), the PSD/CDS government now wants to allow the concession of all social action services to private entities, namely residences and healthcare services, in each Higher Education institution. Operating under the logic of profit, these concessions would result in the deterioration of the quality of their services and an increase in prices.

In addition to these changes, the Council of Ministers' statement indicates that, after negotiations with Chega, PS and IL, Law No. 8/2025, of February 5th, which defines the legal framework for the housing supplement for higher education students and the Mais Superior Programme, is revoked. The statement suggests that current supplements can be integrated into the scholarship amount, which does not necessarily mean more support, but rather its concentration into a single instalment. However, changes to the scholarship allocation regulations remain unclear, and will also be negotiated with Chega, PS, and IL, parties that over the years have rejected increases in social action support, opposed the elimination of tuition fees, charges, and emoluments, and promoted the elitism of Higher Education.

This set of measures expresses a very concrete objective: to restrict access to knowledge only to those who have more, to those who can actually pay the tuition fees, charges, and emoluments. What the PSD/CDS government, with the support of Chega, PS, and IL, intends is to increasingly elitise Higher Education, subjecting it to the logic of profit, transforming what is a strategic pillar of the Country's development into a luxury.

This path must be reversed. What the Country needs is a Higher Education system that contributes to economic, social, and cultural development, an objective for which the PCP has proposals that value and strengthen Higher Education, namely:

the reversal of the underfunding of public Higher Education Institutions through a new Funding Framework Law that includes research and development (R&D); the elimination of tuition fees, charges, and fees for all academic degrees; the strengthening of School Social Action through an increase in the value of scholarships and the number of eligible students; the defence of the unitary character of the Public Higher Education System; the establishment of true democratic participation and management of institutions, reviewing the RJIES and revoking the foundational regime; the fight against all forms of precariousness in Higher Education and Research.

The PCP will continue the fight for these objectives in defence of a Public, Free, Democratic, and Quality Higher Education for all.