Retire at 60, 62 or 66… or all at once? The first debate of the early legislative campaign was the scene of a clash between Gabriel Attal, Manuel Bompard and Jordan Bardella on pension reform and their respective positions. And to defend his own, the president of the RN engaged in a somewhat delicate calculation, which his camp is trying to clear up this Wednesday, June 26.
Legislative debate: Attal, Bardella and Bompard go around in circles in a tense contest 5 days before the vote
On TF1, the president of the far-right party reaffirmed “his priority” on long careers, with a legal starting age of 60 for those who started working before the age of 20. He also said again: that beyond that, there will be progressiveness “, with “a pivotal age of 62 years and 42 years of service” to retire at full rate. So far, nothing very new compared to his previous statements, although the notion “of pivotal age” has never been mentioned in recent weeks by Jordan Bardella… who mocked https://twitter.com/franceinter/status/1216623274618163200.
Then things got complicated. Jordan Bardella carried out a calculation for a person who started working at 24 years old. “You will leave with 42 years of contributions, that is to say 66 years,” he explained.
66 years old? The RN had never mentioned this age and this release did not fail to provoke a reaction from its opponents. “Retirement at 60 on TikTok and at 66 IRL”mocked the outgoing president of the National Assembly Yaël Braun-Pivet on Even Medef did not hope for as much », abounds the communist senator Pierre Ouzoulias when the socialist Boris Vallaud, the ecologist Marine Tondelier and the Horizons mayor of Nice Christian Estrosi point out the inconsistency between this calculation and the stated wish of the RN to repeal the reform voted in 2023 which fixes starting age at 64.
Asked live about this paradox, Jordan Bardella responded aside, believing that “when you started working later, it is normal that you will have to work later. »
The RN assures “not to have changed one iota” of its proposal but…
While the transition from retirement to 64 has pushed millions of French people into the streets for several weeks, the subject is highly sensitive during this electoral period. Even more so for a party which has always castigated the reform carried out by Emmanuel Macron and his government.
This Wednesday, June 26, the figures of the National Rally cooked on this subject therefore redoubled their efforts to try to clear mines. “You know how to count!” Our proposal is 42 annuities and 62 years”declared Laure Lavalette, one of the party spokespersons. “On the example of the person who started working at 24 years old, if you add up these 42 years it takes us to 66 years old”she argues, believing that this remains “better said than the Macron reform” which would lead to a departure at age 67 in this case according to them.
An element of comparison and language taken up identically by the vice-president of the party Sébastien Chenu on LCI and Julien Odoul on RMC. “This individual who starts working at 24 will be able to leave at 62 with a discount”, adds the deputy candidate for re-election in Yonne. On -, he nevertheless suggested that there was no question of revising the threshold of 67 years maximum for full retirement.
“I assure you that we have not changed one iota compared to what we said compared to what we said at the time of the pension reform”, assures Laure Lavalette. Nevertheless, on this sensitive subject because it is more than concerning for the French, the new calculations of the RN risk being complicated, or even not good.
Also see on Le HuffPost :
Legislative elections 2024: the RN and Renaissance plead the “barrier” against the New Popular Front
Could the National Rally really exclude dual nationals from certain professions?
