After twenty days of debate, the tight schedule chosen by the government did not lead to a vote on the bill. The text must now be examined in the Senate.
Like a summary of a crazy parliamentary year, the examination of pension reform at the National Assembly ended Friday, February 17, at midnight, after two intense and eventful weeks. The very subject of the text, very divisive, and the legislative procedure used by the government, Article 47.1 of the Constitutionwhich forced the deputies to examine it in 20 days at the Palais-Bourbon, did not help: the government, the majority and the opposition fought a fierce battle in the hemicycle and outside, for a result in the antipodes, without a vote. While the text will be studied in committee by the senators from February 28, franceinfo returns to the highlights of this fortnight under high tension.
February 2: thousands of amendments are tabled
Thursday, February 2, 5 p.m. The suspense is at its height: how many amendments will be tabled on the bill on pension reform? Are we going to stay around 7,000 amendments, as in the Committee on Social Affairs ? It is ultimately much more. Some 20,000 amendments are filed, including nearly 13,000 for rebellious France alone. From a review clause to assess the effects of the reform to the outright abolition of Article 7, which sets the legal retirement age at 64, the proposed changes are extremely varied.
The number of amendments remains well below the 41,000 tabled in 2020, during the previous attempt to reform pensions, but as soon as the figure is known, the majority protests. “To examine all these amendments would require four months of parliamentary debate. They know it is impossible. It is called obstruction”denounces Aurore Bergé, president of the Renaissance group, on Twitter.
February 6: the motion of the Rassemblement national is rejected
After weeks of consultation, the big day has arrived. Monday, February 6, the deputies meet at 4 p.m. in the Hemicycle to start reviewing the text. The tone is set from the start, the atmosphere is absolutely electric. The Minister of Labor, Olivier Dussopt, is prevented from speaking. In question: the deputies are tormented over a technical question. What referendum motion, procedure which aims to suspend the legislative process of a text of law to submit it to a referendum, should be examined? That of the National Rally is drawn by lot to the detriment of the motion of the Nupes, which refuses to join the extreme right party.
Denouncing a “denial of democracy”, the left opposition slams the desks of the Hemicycle. Finally, it is the motion of the group of Marine Le Pen which is put to the vote and rejected, just like the motion of rejection carried by the Nupes. Four hours after the opening of the debates, the deputies can (finally) consider the substance of the text.
February 10 and 13: rebels cause outcry
Two incidents bear witness to the atmosphere of the debates. It’s first the rebellious deputy Thomas Portes who will set the Palais-Bourbon on fire Friday, February 10. Author of a tweet showing him with his foot resting on a ball bearing the image of the Minister of Labour, Olivier Dussopt, he refuses to apologize and causes a long interruption of the session, the time that the office of the National Assembly meet. The elected representative of La France insoumise receives 15 days of exclusion, the most severe sanction, like Grégoire de Fournas, the deputy of the National Rally punished after his racist remarks on migrants.
If the Nupes strongly criticizes the sanction, it has a very different attitude after the remarks of another rebellious deputy, Aurélien Saintoul, who accuses Olivier Dussopt, Monday February 13, of being “an impostor” and “an assassin”, causing an uproar in the Hemicycle. The left-wing parties split up, leading him to apologize to the Minister of Labour. The elected Hauts-de-Seine receives a call to order.
February 14: Elisabeth Borne flirts with Les Républicains
To pass the pension reform, the majority needs the votes of the Republicans in the National Assembly. In order to rally their votes, the government first operates a concession on long careers before the examination of the text, at the beginning of February, to satisfy the executives of the right-wing party. In the same perspective, Elisabeth Borne takes a new step towards elected LRTuesday 14 February: “Once the early retirement age is reached, the reform does not provide, for long careers, for a contribution period of more than 43 years”responds the Prime Minister to a question from a member of the Republicans.
But are all long careers affected? No, actually. Those who started working at 18 without interruption remain penalized by the reform, despite the Prime Minister’s announcement. It is on these differences between the ages of the start of a career that the oppositions of the left, of the extreme right and of part of the right, like Aurélien Pradié, are doubling their criticism.
February 14: MEPs vote against the senior index
Few articles were finally put to the vote during this very hectic fortnight. One of them represents a setback for the government. This is article 2 of the text, which provided for the creation of a seniors index, intended to encourage companies to promote the employment of older employees. But this index is rejected, Tuesday, February 14late in the evening, by 256 votes against, 203 votes for and 8 abstentions.
Government spokesman Olivier Véran judges this rejection “incomprehensible”. However, it is explained by the classic opposition of the Nupes and the National Rally, but also by the decision of 38 of the 44 Republican deputies present during the vote to sweep a “alibi article” And “unconstitutional”according to Eric Ciotti, the leader of the party.
February 16: the executive is trapped on minimum pensions
This is one of the angles of attack of the Nupes: who will really be affected by the 1,200 euros minimum pension after the entry into force of the reform? The left-wing deputies are constantly challenging the government and Olivier Dussopt on the subject, meeting after meeting. Wednesday, February 15, the Minister of Labor ensures that “40,000 more people [passeraient chaque année] the milestone of 85% of the minimum wage”. The day after, the socialist Jérôme Guedj goes on the offensive : the deputy of Essonne goes in the morning to the direction of the Social security (DSS) to demand accounts.
In the Hemicycle and on Twitter, the elected representative assures the afternoon that the figure of 40,000 concerns the “number of people who will receive the maximum revaluation of 100 euros” in 2030, without necessarily reaching a pension of 1,200 euros. Olivier Dussopt responds sharply: “You have lost control for a few days, you do not know how to redo the cherry”. “I don’t have to report on the channels or on the way I do the forecasts”he says.
February 16: Nupes tears itself apart over its strategy
The Nupes, which tabled around 18,000 amendments, is united on the merits, uniformly opposing the government’s project. But the strategies diverge on the form. As the debates skate through the first week and into the second, environmentalists and socialists defend the withdrawal of the amendments tabled before article 7, in order to discuss raising the legal retirement ageat the heart of the government’s project.
The PS and EELV deputies take action on Wednesday evening by withdrawing almost all of their amendments before this article. They are imitated by the Communists on Thursday morning. But the LFI deputies maintain theirs. And Jean-Luc Mélenchon, who has not been a deputy since June 2022, is sowing disorder within the alliance by criticizing on Twitter The strategy “incomprehensible” to want “dash” towards article 7. The majority is engulfed in the breach and denounces the divisions of the left, which are spread out in broad daylight before the end of the examination of the text.
February 17: Review ends without a vote
As expected, the debates ended at midnight at the Palais-Bourbon. The text will be examined in the Senate from the end of February. Last gasp: almost absent from the debates, the National Rally wanted to regain control by filing a spontaneous motion of censure which was examined and rejected overnight. The text collected only 89 votes, far from an absolute majority (which is 287 votes).