TThe Government opposes the Republic’s proposal requiring no outstanding debts to Social Security or the Tax Authority to receive reimbursements for the Social Mobility Allowance and is calling for a revision of this rule. This stance was made clear in the statement on the Draft Ordinance set to introduce changes to the current HSE regime, where the Regional Secretariat of Tourism, Environment and Culture (SRTAC) strongly opposed the measure.
In an announcement, the Regional Government says it does not find “any legal basis for this proposal that makes the payment of the reimbursement dependent on the regularity of the contributory and tax situation of the beneficiary, before Social Security and the Tax and Customs Authority,” recalling that the Social Allowance of Mobility “is the legal mechanism of excellence, which allows all the residents in Portugal feel as equal as possible, in terms of guarantee of constitutional freedoms and continuity in the territory.”
Miguel Albuquerque defends that the Subsidy Social Mobility Policy “must be treated in accordance with the statute that is inherently assigned to it: the social protection that allows equal travel to all Portuguese, in full respect for the Portuguese Republic Constitution.”
“In mainland Portugal, residents can travel by train, bus, car, boat, or plane, regardless of whether they have debts or receive subsidies for these activities, without any impact from their financial situation. However, island residents face penalties if they have outstanding debts. These citizens, who rely solely on air travel for territorial continuity, are exercising what is considered a social right,” emphasises the SRTAC in its statement.
The SRTAC used the following examples to strengthen their argument:
“Is a resident, for reasons either within or beyond their control, has accumulated debts. Currently undergoing continuous medical treatment on the mainland, this resident lacks the means to immediately pay off these debts and is therefore considered a debtor. This situation leaves someone already in a vulnerable physical and emotional state, having to cover the full cost of flights, as they are barred from accessing the Social Mobility Allowance due to their indebtedness,” questions the SRTAC.
“Another example involves a resident who was assigned a debt they didn’t cause, but inherited through a legal relationship with a third party. This resident can’t pay off the entire amount, so they’re considered a debtor. As a result, they’re forced to cover the cost of the flight without the right to equal travel, for a situation that isn’t their fault.”
Finally: “A former resident now living on the mainland has parents who are in debt, for reasons either within or beyond their control. During peak travel times from Madeira, like Christmas and New Year’s Eve, they can’t afford the steep cost of flights. The idea would be for the parents to visit their child on the mainland for Christmas. But as debtors, they’d have to pay the full high fare instead of the resident’s rate of €79. Does this mean families are being prevented from reuniting?”
For SRTAC, the issue at hand is not about whether debts exist or who is responsible for them. Instead, it’s about the unique nature of the legal framework for the Social Mobility Subsidy, which belongs to the realm of social protection and constitutional law, not fiscal discipline. This stance emphasises that, as its name suggests, it’s a fundamental social protection subsidy, and therefore should be addressed within the scope of social security benefits it provides to individuals in isolation—benefits that the Portuguese Constitution itself firmly safeguards.
The Regional Secretariat emphasises that treating the Social Mobility Allowance like any other subsidy goes against the national principle of equal freedom of movement and territorial continuity. Therefore, he calls for a proper revision of this rule, which, he argues, lacks legal grounds, considering the legal and social purpose of the allowance.
Samantha Gannon
info at madeira-weekly.com
