“Present through heart and work”
Above all, he was delighted with the Pau demographic figures, and once again assured that he did not want to let go of this mandate: “physically not present”, he is “in spirit, heart and work”.
The editorial team advises you
“I care about what united us, a certain way of being together, of supporting us together,” declared the Prime Minister, referring to the small and large municipalities of the agglomeration, recalling that his great-grandfather was mayor of Sendets. He invited us to “unite to move forward. Well done ! I kiss you all from the bottom of my heart.” There was no shortage of applause.
The first vice-president, Monique Semavoine, then took the hand to orchestrate a council which will quickly get rid of the shadow of the mayor of Pau, after a minute of silence for Mayotte and the vote for aid of €25,000 .
“In the oven and in the mill”
Obviously, for half an hour, the combination advocated by the mayor-president-Prime Minister caused opposition elected officials and the mayor’s supporters to react. “We cannot be in the oven and the mill,” said Arnaud Jacottin, the mayor of Billère. “By wanting too much to be omnipresent and omniscient, we become omnipotent and end up obsessed with the race for mandates and functions.” Eric Bourdet (Lons) denounces “mandates and multiple functions” which harm democracy and efficiency.
The editorial team advises you
Julie Joanin (Pau) plays in defense: “It’s only you who doesn’t see how lucky we are. He excels in his duties and is efficient. It’s been a week, give him a chance! » Emmanuelle Camelot, for her part, does not say she is proud of François Bayrou’s “blunders”, but embarrassed: “If we talk about Pau, it’s to make fun of it! »
Opposition leader Jérôme Marbot is trying to calm things down. For him, both the presence of the mayor in Pau on Monday and his absence this Thursday prove that he cannot fulfill all his functions. “It is impossible to be the Prime Minister of France currently, with the unprecedented crisis our country is going through, and to be the president of a large city with a lot at stake.” For environmentalist Jean-François Blanco, the mayor “feeds the gap that he claims to fight between public opinion and the political class”.
The editorial team advises you
Jean-Louis Peres takes up his arguments from the municipal council, arguing for “local anchoring”. Natalie Francq (Billère), she will put the two parties in agreement by talking about the status of the elected official, which is for her “the real serious subject”: “All the mayors of small towns know how heavy the burden is , and we can no longer find people to be mayor.”
The interest of the exchanger in question
Exchanges which ended up being very tense, but once the agenda was launched, the atmosphere calmed down. First around the original budget, where opponents once again estimated that his vote could have waited for that of the Nation’s budget, while Jean-Louis Peres calls for “caution”. On the price of water, then on the Idron interchange, a peaceful debate finally began, involving elected officials from all sides to defend their arguments, when the match is usually between the president and opposition elected officials.
Thus on the interchange, for which prior consultation had to be approved in order to adapt the PLUi, Eric Bourdet is concerned about the possible increase in induced traffic and the financial cost it represents. The mayor of Gelos, Pascal Mora joins him, announcing that he will abstain “because I am not convinced of the usefulness of the interchange. And we have other financial priorities.”
Valérie Revel says “share these questions around the necessity and decency of spending”, recalling that the Department must “invest enormously €11 million out of €18 million” while “the finances of local authorities will become more and more constraints. There are going to be priorities, particularly for services to the population; we should rather find other alternatives, rather than building all roads? I don’t think it’s a priority, not to mention ecologically.” She warns that Lescar’s elected officials will abstain.
While Emmanuelle Camelot talks about a project from another time, Pascal Mora believes that it “deserves a real debate”. “This project has a risk of not providing solutions while the financial commitments are enormous, given the money that we have to put into mobility, digital, social, housing. The question is where to put priorities. It’s a shame that we don’t have this reflection with all the players who are going to put money into it.”
A real debate to deepen
Jean-François Blanco shares his “strong reservations”, but wants “a real discussion on mobility choices”. He regrets the consultation process: “We present a project without any other solution, you have to be for or against. It’s a limited debate.”
Michel Capéran defends this deliberation “very upstream” which allows us to “anticipate” and have a “prospective vision” on the land which will be impacted by this interchange, dedicated to developing economic activity and urbanization at the same time. ‘East of the urban area.
When Blanco suggests withdrawing from the deliberation to form a working group, Nicolas Patriarche takes the lead to close the discussions. “The debates are very interesting”, he begins, referring to the conferences, “normal functioning” […] “so as not to end tomorrow”. “We have different opinions on mobility”, which does not prevent, according to him, from “setting the objectives for the compliance of the PLUi”.
Monique Sémavoine puts the vote. The seven abstentions and eight votes against do not prevent adoption. But it has been a long time since a calm and dense debate took place during a Pau council. We dare not deduce that the absence of the owner of the place is the only explanation.
