Two motions of censure on the budget will be debated and then put to the vote on Monday, October 24 in the National Assembly. A much too classic choreography, a kind of political ballet whose choreography has already been written for a long time. These motions of censure, one from the Nupes, the other from the RN, will try to overthrow the government following the use of 49.3 to pass the budget without a vote. Concretely, there will be two debates and two votes, except that at the end of this day, nothing will have happened.
To use the vocabulary of classical dance, these two motions are a jolt, a hopping with both feet to fall back into the same position. These motions will not pass, the various groups have already announced their intentions. It takes 289 votes to bring down the government, much more than the RN-Nupes addition, knowing that in these two camps, no one will dare to split: the Nupes will not vote for the RN motion… and vice versa. If they each dream of bringing down the government, their disagreements are too deep and prevent them from doing a pas de deux together.
The right will not support these motions. The LRs made a few arabesques during the budget debates, they denounced 49.3 and the “denial of democracy” but it ends in a pirouette (a turn on oneself on the tip of the foot… it’s nice but very technical). Sunday in a forum, 53 LR and related deputies confirmed that they would not vote for the motions. They nevertheless ask to be better heard by the government. The executive can rest easy. His last act is not for today.
Beyond the ballet metaphor, what to expect from the day’s debates? Has a farandole of postures. A Nupes executive assumes: “A motion is used to have speaking time.” Except that one can wonder about the spectacle that is offered to the French. From the start, we have known that the opposition will not vote for the budget. It’s considered political support, you might find it silly, but that’s how it is. So we knew from the start that the government would use 49.3.
In fact, what this case teaches us is that our Assembly is much more “proportional” than before. Technically, it is more representative of the country’s political tendencies. But in minds, in practices, in the search for compromise, in co-construction, in discussions, we are far… very far. And it makes you wonder if our elected officials realize this, if they really understood the messages from the ballot box – criticism concerns all groups.
To return to ballet, short of a big throw, or a constitutional doe leap, it’s hard to see how it’s going to be able to work out.