Declared “admissible” but subject to a lively debate on its constitutionality, a text repealing the retirement age at 64 in France was on Tuesday at the heart of a showdown between the oppositions and a presidential camp determined to prevent a vote in The national assembly.
The bill presented by the centrist group Liot must be examined on Wednesday in the Social Affairs Committee, before arriving on June 8 in the hemicycle.
And despite the slim chances of succeeding on the legislative level, it maintains the flame of the opponents of the reform promulgated in mid-April and carries a political dimension such that it worries the government.
“We are not lying to the French by carrying, with the greatest demagogy, a text which everyone here knows, for good, that it would be censored by the Constitutional Council”, launched Prime Minister Élisabeth Borne, before the deputies.
“There should be no debate on this article which is clearly unconstitutional”, said shortly before the President of the National Assembly, Yaël Braun-Pivet.
But Eric Coquerel, of the radical left party Les Insoumis, is not of this opinion: “I have decided to make the bill admissible”.
He delivered to the press a decision without surprise, after having been seized as chairman of the Finance Committee by elected representatives of the majority calling on him to block in the name of the Constitution.
Surrounded by several elected officials from the left-wing coalition Nupes, Mr. Coquerel denounced “pressure that has been made in recent days”, in particular from the Prime Minister, Elisabeth Borne.
“I find it a bit paradoxical that the executive is involved at this point in a purely parliamentary decision,” he attacked.
The “cost” of the proposal
It is a “partisan and political decision” by Mr. Coquerel, a “serious attack on our institutions”, replied the presidents of the majority groups.
“We will unite tomorrow [mercredi] in committee, ”promised the leader of the Macronist deputies, Aurore Bergé.
At the heart of these contests with very legal appearances, article 40 of the Constitution. It provides that the initiatives of parliamentarians are not admissible if they entail an increase in public charges. However, Liot’s text costs “more than 20 billion”, hammers the presidential camp.
Eric Coquerel, defending himself from any “partisan logic”, argued in favor of admissibility by asserting “the rights of oppositions” and the traditional “flexibility” on legislative proposals.
What is the outcome of this dialogue of the deaf? After the green light from Mr. Coquerel, the presidential camp has a few tricks up its sleeve to try to prevent a vote.
He initially hopes to succeed in removing the 64-year-old repeal article on Wednesday during its examination in committee. This would force the Liot group to reintroduce its measure by an amendment before June 8. A scenario that would authorize the President of the National Assembly to brandish the ax of financial admissibility herself.
“Political earthquake” on the horizon?
“I will take my responsibilities,” Yaël Braun-Pivet said on Tuesday, hinting that she was going to do it, after being criticized in her camp for not having blocked earlier. “I hear people say: it would be undemocratic to prevent the vote [de la proposition Liot]I find it crazy because it is the application of the law and there is nothing more democratic than to apply the law, ”she insisted.
The president “changed foot, recalled by the patrol of the Élysée and Matignon”, commented the deputy Liot Benjamin Saint-Huile.
The majority tax the repeal text of “populist” and “scam”. Because even adopted by the Assembly, it would have “no chance” of going to the end of its parliamentary course, pleaded Ms. Braun-Pivet.
But the argument is not good, according to the Liot group led by deputy Bertrand Pancher, confident of a possible victory on June 8 by uniting the voices of the left, the National Rally (RN, far right) and certain deputies Republicans (right). “I do not see how President Macron could disregard” a vote of the Assembly, it would be a “political earthquake”.
In the meantime, the unions have called on employees to participate massively in a fourteenth day of mobilization on June 6 against the pension reform, which raised the retirement age from 62 to 64 years old.