Gérald Darmanin’s text must arrive in November in the Senate then at the beginning of next year in the Assembly. But no political agreement has yet been reached to pass this text through Parliament.
After pensions, it is the government text which concentrates the most tensions and criticism. The immigration bill, which aims to strengthen the fight against illegal immigration but also to create a residence permit for professions in shortage, is at the heart of negotiations between the government and parliamentarians. The discussions have so far been concentrated between LR and the executive, but the leaders of the right have makes this specific residence permit a red line, making, at this stage, an agreement impossible.
For fear of seeing this measure disappear, the left wing of the majority is attempting a counter-offensive with certain representatives of Nupes, in the form of a column published Monday September 11 in Release. The outcome of this emblematic bill, carried by the Minister of the Interior Gérald Darmanin, remains pending for the moment. Franceinfo gives you the keys to understanding this text and what is happening behind the scenes.
What’s the calendar ?
Postponed many times for a year, the immigration bill will return to Parliament in the fall. The examination of a government text was interrupted after the adoption of the pension reform, although it had been adopted, on March 15, in committee in the Senate where the right, in the majority, had clearly toughened it. “The discussion is very open and I am waiting for the end of the senatorial elections to resume discussions, in particular with the centrist group and the LR group in the Senate”confided Gérald Darmanin, during a trip to Guadeloupe, on September 5.
Guest of France 2 on September 11, the Minister of the Interior specified that the text would finally be examined from November 6 in the Senate then at the start of 2024 in the National Assembly. Discussions very late compared to the initial schedule.
What does the bill contain?
It is the text presented in February in the Council of Ministers which will be discussed in Parliament, and not another version, as was once the case. The temptation to split the text into two parts to vote one blow with the right and one blow with the left was also abandoned. “Two parts” of the same bill will thus be presented to Parliament, according to Gérald Darmanin: a repressive component for “be tough with delinquent foreigners” and one “integration section” For “people who work”. “The government’s line is to be tough on the bad guys and be nice to the good guys”, often sums up the tenant of Beauvau. Clearly, a very Macronist “at the same time”, with the risk, in a situation of relative majority, of displeasing both sides of the hemicycle.
Concretely, the government wants to create, in article 3 of the bill, a residence permit for “professions in tension”, with a validity of one year, for foreigners working clandestinely in sectors such as construction or the hotel industry, with a labor shortage. If the bill is adopted, the system will come into force “experimentally” until December 31, 2026. A report on this measure will then be sent to Parliament. In terms of integration, the government wants to raise the prerequisites required of people who wish to settle in the territory, in particular by requiring a minimum level of French. He also wants to make expulsions easier for foreigners “not respecting the values of the Republic” and better fight against smugglers.
Where are the negotiations with the right?
The Republicans, aware of the price of their votes and anxious to no longer appear as substitutes after the pension reform, intend to impose their very harsh proposals. Their red line has been known for a long time: no regularizations, for fear of a “air call”. “If the government gives us a text that suits us or that we amend in our direction, we will vote for it, but if the government does not delete [la carte de séjour pour] professions in tension, then we will vote against. Things are very clear”, the boss of LR senators, Bruno Retailleau, recently confided to franceinfo.
Even more dangerous for the majority, the right is threatening a motion of censure if the government persists on this path. “J“I have very clearly said and repeated for a year to Madame Borne that we would table a motion of censure on a lax text on the subject”warned the leader of LR deputies, Olivier Marleix, in an interview with Figarodated September 11. “I was obviously heard, otherwise they wouldn’t have backed down eight times. Today, I’m saying it again.”
Aurélien Pradié, rebellious with a few others during the retirement episode, is today aligned with his camp. Nearby Parisianthe Lot deputy calls on his political family to consider “seriously” a motion of censure against the government to defend its positions on subjects such as the budget or immigration. LR’s intransigence on this last question therefore leaves the majority with extremely little room for maneuver. Questioned by franceinfo, Gérald Darmanin’s entourage refuses to make any comments on the current negotiations.
What is happening with the left?
According to recent press information, the executive is tempted to delete the famous article 3 on professions in tension in order to win the vote of LR parliamentarians. Or to pass this measure by decree or circular, and no longer in the bill. Enough to ignite the powder within a part of the majority which is keen on the “humanity” aspect of the text. “The votes that the abandonment of the measurement of professions in tension would gain at LR will generate losses within the majority, whether for me or other colleagues”warns Renaissance MP Marc Ferracci.
It is in this context that was published on September 12 in Release, a column co-signed by parliamentarians from the left – excluding LFI – and the left wing of the majority. There we find Fabien Roussel (PCF), Boris Vallaud (PS) but also Sacha Houlié, the president (Renaissance) of the law commission. This text, which notably calls for the regularization of undocumented workers in “sectors in tension”, is in reality the result of intense behind-the-scenes negotiations for several weeks on this subject. At the heart of the discussions: the tabling of a joint bill from the left and the majority. “A platform can lead to consequences”recently confided a left-wing elected official.
This will complicate the work of the executive. “The president is not very happy [de la tribune]. This will create tensions within the group [Renaissance]“reported Monday evening a close friend of Emmanuel Macron. “This remains a forum which proposes to maintain the text as it came out of the Council of Ministers. There are worse disruptions”, puts an influential parliamentarian into perspective. The vote of certain left-wing deputies in favor of a hypothetical bill on regularizations would not lead to their vote in favor of the government bill either. The prospect of a 49.3 (which allows the text to be adopted without a vote in the Assembly) therefore still remains on the table.
Why are we talking about a referendum?
In his letter to party leaders after “the Saint-Denis meetings”, Emmanuel Macron writes that he will make a proposal “in the coming weeks” to broaden the scope of the referendum provided for by article 11 of the Constitution, a demand in particular from the right and the extreme right. The Republicans and the National Rally want to organize a referendum on migration policy, which the Constitution does not currently allow. In response to the president’s letter, Eric Ciotti, the boss of the Republicans, asks in particular “a precise timetable” on the subject.
For its part, the left is unsurprisingly opposed to such a proposal. “If it’s to debate the hours of a referendum on immigration and attend the honeymoon between Macron and the far right, it will be without me”, warned the boss of EELV, Marine Tondelier. The majority themselves are not very excited. The boss of Renaissance, Stéphane Séjourné, ensures that “the question of broadening the scope of the referendum, in particular to immigration”, appears to him “delicate”with the risk of “additional division of our society”. “I am not in favor of making immigration a subject that lights the fire, on which gasoline is poured every day”François Bayrou, the president of MoDem, said on Sunday in The Parisian. “A referendum would be counterproductive”, also judged the president of the Economic, Social and Environmental Council, Thierry Beaudet. The organization of such a referendum, which would require a very hypothetical revision of the Constitution, seems very distant.