The reform of pension systems has never been easy. No one wants to deal with it, unless it becomes almost an urgency. The government of Luis Lacalle in Uruguay has been courageous enough to raise the issue and to present a draft that includes, basically, a gradual increase in retirement age from 60 to 65 years and a unification of all pension plans. As Uruguayan are, the process followed all institutional and prudential rules: the president sent the project to all parties and even visited the opposition to explain it.
But all political actors want to avoid the costs. For the governmental coalition it is a matter of reaching a wide consensus, so the cost is dispersed among many, if not all. The opposition is split: the communists and socialists are against it but the more moderate partners in the Frente Amplio see the reform not only includes many of the items they themselves proposed, but they also believe that it is better that such a costly political reform is headed by the government, taking a much larger part of the political costs.
Nos what if they become political benefits? Voters may regret working more year but they may understand it, considering the main changes will impact those who come after them, or are still far from retirement age. And 65 is already the rule in neighboring countries and others in the region, and many the world over.
Besides the issue of retirement age the unification of plans creates trouble with the military, who have their own and more beneficial than the general pensions. I do not know if it is autonomously funded but if it were they would have a strong argument to have their own; and the rest would have the argument about how is it they cannot have a choice to select whatever plan they think best. If it is not, then it may be a privilege.
Anyway, so far Uruguay is displaying its usual process of moderation, showing institutional quality at work, some of the best in Latin America, that many other countries in the region should envy.