Policy. After François Bayrou's speech, the reactions of the Manche deputies

Until the last hours, the Socialist Party demanded a “remarkable” gesture on pension reform, erected as a symbol of a desire, or not, to find compromises. In the end, there was no question of suspension or freezing. And even less repeal.

“Censorship? We’ll see on Thursday”

As Boris Vallaud said, the account is not there. Bayrou is already saying that if there is no agreement within three months, we will stay on the Borne reform. If Medef and the government veto, what happens? It's a somewhat sham proposition, a way of preparing people's minds for a status quo. We are defending our social model, which these reforms endanger. On the other hand, he did not speak at all of the contribution of the great fortunes. Where are the commitments made by ministers in the negotiations? Where are the compromises? The Prime Minister must clearly answer our questions.

La France insoumise tabled this Tuesday, January 14, 2025, a motion of censure against the government signed by 57 other deputies, from its ranks but also from communist and environmentalist groups.

Will the socialists vote for it? “It's too early to tellsays Anna Pic. Until Thursday, we will wonder. »

Also a way of maintaining pressure, while discussions on pensions must begin the next day.

“If there had been a suspension, I would have understood it”

For the moment, it is only a question of large construction sites and chapter headings.

If there was a suspension of the pension reform, I would have understood it. I want to believe that solutions can be found over the next three months in consultation with the social partners. There were, for each of the deputies except LFI and the RN, things to take. I think, for example, that the Prime Minister is going in the right direction on Education and agriculture, and on the other hand I am totally opposed to proportional representation. On the accumulation of mandates, on the other hand, I think we can look, particularly in small municipalities. Right now we are participating in many vow ceremonies. Throughout the territory, we hear a desire for stability after such a special year. We may not agree on everything, but what if, rather than coming up with our own red lines, everyone came with proposals that could move towards consensus, common denominators? Bayrou has opened up avenues for parliamentarians to take advantage of.

-

“Bayrou opens doors”

In the long term, relief usually comes from finding solutions and achieving results.

The immediate reading of a government called to live day by day rather indicated the need, for the Prime Minister, not to offend anyone, by giving everyone a minimum of something to grind.

Neither rupture nor continuitythe small steps rather than the unobtainable breath, somewhere between the obligatory passage and the broken door.

It was a speech without any major surprises or announcements on the substance, but which opened up to discussions and rethinking the substance. François Bayrou took the time to bring everyone together around the table before his speech. He listened, took note, gave pledges. I particularly appreciate that on pensions, he puts the social partners back at the center of the game. Which Michel Barnier did not do, for example. He does not close any avenues, while recalling the requirements of the country's financial situation. The question now is how much time he will have to put his ideas into music.

“He did the job”

The urgency, in fact, is not about seduction, but rather about avoiding being rejected. So, the inventory in Prévert is long, richer in appointments than in announcements.

A “conclave” on pensions, “a discussion” on proportional representation, “a major consultation” on school time, “negotiations” on New Caledonia, “interministerial committees” on immigration, a “consultation” on work and wages…

He did the job. A general policy speech is a particular exercise, through which few of the details that one might hope for appear. Things stand out, like the bank of democracy or debureaucratization. I appreciated that he talked about housing, which is a real subject in the Channel, and the yellow vests' complaints. He was also clear about the reality of the debt. My question, on the other hand, concerns pension reform. I am not saying that the remedy is optimal today, far from it, but we must finance our social model well. Does this opening of negotiations not risk creating disappointed hopes? And ultimately, a little more resentment?

Follow all the news from your favorite cities and media by subscribing to Mon Actu.