“A society which does not produce children is a society which will die”, justifies Sylvain Maillard

“We have children because that is the meaning of history,” insists the president of the Renaissance group in the National Assembly.

Faced with the fall in the birth rate, the President of the Republic called, during his press conference on Tuesday evening, for a “demographic rearmament”, expression which caused controversy among feminist associations. “Look at the history of humanity, a society that does not produce children is a society that will die”justifies Thursday January 18 on franceinfo the president of the Renaissance group in the National Assembly, Sylvain Maillard, who also denounces a “bad controversy”.

Demographics, “it was a French force, it is no longer a French force”, notes Sylvain Maillard, with a year 2023 which once again saw the birth rate drop in France (678,000 births, or 6.6% less than in 2022). THE “demographic rearmament”explains the MP, is a question “philosophical, perhaps economic too, and political”.

“In the organization that we have of our society, if we accept to have a society where there are only elderly people, it is the death of a society, of a political society. We need more children, ensure that there is a balance between births and deaths”, estimates Sylvain Maillard, assuming the desire to have a proactive pronatalist policy. Criticized on word choice “rearmament”the Macronist considers that it is a “bad controversy”.

“Look in the history of humanity, a society which does not produce children is a society which will die, so it is important for us, for what we are, for what France is, to to have children, to be dynamic. He keeps on : “We have children because it is the meaning of history to build a civilization which is ours, which is French, and to ensure that it continues. It endures. These are the strengths of a society. They are built through youth.”

Among the measures announced to launch this “demographic rearmament”, Emmanuel Macron highlighted the end of parental leave, replaced by birth leave, shorter but better paid. “The objective is that it is taken, that is to say that parents can have the choice. A real choice to stay with their child at the beginning and we know how important the 1 first 000 days [période couverte justement par le congé parental, mais qui ne le serait plus avec le congé de naissance d’une durée d’environ 182 jours“, précise Sylvain Maillard.

“Un choix pour s’organiser”, poursuit-il, “un choix accepté et volontaire des uns et des autres et qu’il ne soit pas sur la base d’un choix financier. À l’heure actuelle, c’est sur un choix financier. Ceux qui ont les moyens s’arrêtent. Ceux qui n’ont pas les moyens ne s’arrêtent pas. Ce que nous voulons, c’est que tous ceux qui ont envie de s’arrêter puissent s’arrêter, donc il faut mieux le rémunérer et donc il sera plus court”.