“No witch hunt”, defends Sylvain Maillard, while nine deputies from the presidential camp were absent during the vote

“97% of my group was present,” argues the leader of the Renaissance deputies in the National Assembly. According to him, this rejection is just a desire “to bring down the government”.

“There will be no majority to vote on a motion to reject,” filed by environmentalists, assured Sylvain Maillard Monday December 11 on franceinfo. However, this is what happened a few hours later. 270 deputies voted for, 265 against. Thus, the text carried by the Minister of the Interior Gérald Darmanin was rejected before even being examined in the National Assembly. Unheard of in 25 years.

To avoid it, Matignon had, however, asked the ministers to cancel any travel so that all the deputies were present in the hemicycle. But nine deputies from the presidential camp were nevertheless absent on Monday during the vote on the motion for prior rejection of the immigration bill, tabled by environmentalists. There is no “no witch hunt”defends Tuesday December 12 on France Inter, Sylvain Maillard, deputy for Paris and president of the Renaissance group in the National Assembly.

The vote was decided by five votes.

Nine deputies were absent from the majority benches while the vote was decided by five votes: five Renaissance, three from MoDem and one Horizons. “97% of my group was present”, would like to highlight Sylvain Maillard. “In the six and a half years that we have been in charge, there have never been so many deputies present at a specific time to make a vote,” assures the leader of the Renaissance deputies at the Palais-Bourbon. He explained on France Inter that certain deputies were absent “had medical appointments” before interrupting not wishing “no more going into detail.”

Sylvain Maillard believes that this setback for the government has another explanation: “We are in a relative majority, it was the French who chose it”, he recalls before adding: “When all the oppositions, which have nothing to do with each other, unite together, yes, we lose.” Like the Minister of the Interior, Sylvain Maillard recognizes that the vote on this motion of rejection is “a failure” for the presidential majority.

The MP denounces “the irresponsibility of the oppositions” Who “refused to discuss immigration even though they tabled a number of amendments.” 2,600 were to be discussed in the hemicycle. “It is our role, we are parliamentarians, to vote for a text which corresponds to the wishes of the French”, he regrets. The president of the Renaissance group in the National Assembly denounces “crazy oppositions” during the vote on Monday. “Sandrine Rousseau who votes with Éric Ciotti, Mathilde Panot with Marine Le Pen”, he lists, ironically. According to Sylvain Maillard, the opposition parties, from La France insoumise to the National Rally, “joined up” in the only goal “to annoy, to bring down the government”.

The government will have to decide on Tuesday on the future of its immigration bill. Three options are possible: the pure and simple abandonment of the text, sending it back to the Senate or finally, submitting it to the Joint Commission, made up of seven deputies and seven senators. The three groups in the presidential camp in the National Assembly (Renaissance, MoDem and Horizons) are calling for the immigration bill not to be withdrawn. “It is the Prime Minister’s job to find the ways forward so that in the coming weeks, we can adopt these measures expected by the French.”

The government only having a relative majority to rely on in the Assembly, Sylvain Maillard believes “that we must have shorter texts with a single political object”. Should the immigration bill be split? “I do not know”, replies the leader of the Renaissance deputies. But it is a possible avenue to ultimately obtain “these two major measures”, “wanted by the French”, to know “better deport offenders” And “better integrate foreigners who come to work in shortage professions”.