Immigration law continues to divide. Article 3, which aims to regularize undocumented immigrants in professions in shortage, is at the center of the debates. To summarize, everyone accuses each other of lying, and at the same time everyone is bluffing.
It is article 3 of the law, the one which aims to regularize undocumented immigrants in professions in tension which crystallizes the debates. First, the government accuses the right of hypocrisy on this subject. The proof is Gérald Darmanin, who on Monday October 30 jokes about these parliamentarians, notably LR, who quietly ask the prefects to regularize their nannies. Even Olivier Marleix, the boss of the right-wing deputies, recognized it: he is opposed to regularizations, except for the hospital in his constituency, because “hospitals need it”, he declares. Which does not prevent him from castigating a law which constitutes, according to him, “a call of air”understand whoever wants.
The majority’s position is not much clearer. Already this article 3 seems to have been introduced not out of conviction, but to give assurances to the left wing of the majority, and to hold the “at the same time”. An artifice which did not last very long since Olivier Dussopt, the Minister of Labor, supposed to be the guarantor of this balance, disappeared from the project partway through.
Darmanin and Borne clash over this article
As for the Prime Minister, after having coaxed the left-wing leaders of her camp, she invited LR Bruno Retailleau to dinner to tell him all the bad things she thought about this article 3. She has nothing to do with it, he she said in substance, she could give it up. As an immediate consequence, Gérald Darmanin, who was also ready to give up on this article, suddenly found a new interest in it. For the Minister of the Interior, hanging on to it means countering the attempts to torpedo it by the Prime Minister who would like to see him fall on this issue.
The interest of workers and the interest of the French is not the main thing. Three weeks after the Arras attack, we have a law proposing to toughen immigration rules, and a sort of unanimity to prevent it from being passed. On one side are the right-wingers who have been demanding more firmness for years and on the other, a deaf majority who cling to an article which prevents any compromise. This article 3 has become the battlefield of two opposing ambitions: Gérald Darmanin, from the right, who is keen on this article intended for his left wing and Élisabeth Borne, from the left, who turns out to be more to the right than We didn’t think so. But the subject of immigration undoubtedly deserves better than a race to the best opponent or the umpteenth episode of the Borne-Darmanin match, better than this vast lying poker game.