The presidential camp succeeded in unraveling on Wednesday May 31 in committee a bill attempting to repeal the retirement age at 64. The oppositions denounced “scheming” for the sole purpose of preventing a vote on June 8 in the hemicycle of the National Assembly. The majority thus won a stage victory, before the text arrives in session next week, which maintains the flame of opponents of the disputed reform, promulgated in mid-April.
The deputies narrowly voted, by 38 votes against 34, the deletion of the main article of this bill of the independent group Freedoms, Independents, Overseas and Territories (LIOT). Most of the elected Republicans (LR) joined their voices to those of the majority during debates that looked like a pitched battle.
The deputies of the left-wing coalition New People’s Ecological and Social Union (Nupes) ended up slamming the door of the Social Affairs Committee to criticize “manoeuvres”. The leader of the La France insoumise (LFI) group Mathilde Panot called for “maximum popular pressure on June 6”, during the day of mobilization organized by the unions.
After unraveling the text, the Nupes had attempted a counter-attack in committee with thousands of amendments. The goal? Prevent the debates from going to a conclusion, so that the initial version of the proposal is discussed on June 8, and not its torpedoed version. A “flagrant obstruction” in the eyes of the president of the commission Fadila Khattabi (Renaissance), who decided to dismiss them. She then had her decision approved by the board of the commission, despite strong protests from the left.
Boosted atmosphere
“Our constitutional right to table amendments has been violated,” denounced socialist Arthur Delaporte. “The maneuvers of Macronie and LR deputies in the Social Affairs Committee to prevent the deputies from voting on June 8 to repeal” the reform “don’t honor either our democracy or our republican principles”, reacted earlier the president of the RN deputies, Marine Le Pen.
Thus unraveled, the text was adopted in committee. This new battle around the pension reform had started in a heated atmosphere in the morning in the crowded room of the commission, which the journalists were forced to leave.
At the initiative of this bill, the rapporteur Charles de Courson (LIOT) claimed an “opportunity to come out on top” of the challenge of the pension reform. The centrist called for exploring new “avenues” of funding such as “a higher contribution from heritage income”.
The Renaissance leader, Aurore Bergé, quipped about the change of footing of Charles de Courson, a veteran of the Assembly, who according to her has long played the role of “Don Quixote of our public finances”. He turned into “Che Guevara de la Marne”, mocked Alexandre Vincendet (LR). Liot’s bill has very little chance of succeeding in the legislative plan, but it continues to unite opponents of the reform. And it embarrasses the executive, worried about the political impact of a possible repeal of the 64 years by the Assembly, just a few weeks after the promulgation of this highly contested reform.
Return of repeal by amendment?
On Tuesday, Elisabeth Borne accused the opposition of lying to the French “by carrying, with the greatest demagogy, a text which everyone knows here, for good, that it would be censored by the Constitutional Council”. The deputies of the majority insist that this text should not be examined, because it derogates from article 40 of the Constitution, which provides that a bill must not create a public charge.
They qualify as “serious attack” on the institutions the decision of the president of the Finance Committee, Éric Coquerel (LFI), to declare the bill “admissible”, when it would cost more than 15 billion euros according to the ‘executive. After the removal of the 64-year-old repeal article in committee, the presidential camp now intends to brandish again the sledgehammer argument of article 40 before June 8.
Its preferred scenario is that LIOT reintroduces its flagship measure through an amendment. And that the President of the National Assembly brandishes at this time the ax of financial admissibility, thus preventing a vote in the hemicycle. “I will take my responsibilities”, assured Yaël Braun-Pivet, member of Renaissance, on Tuesday, after being criticized in her own camp for not having blocked the text earlier.