disappointed by Barnier's announcements, the president of Gironde counterattacks

IHe hoped for the promise of a “sustainable and evolving revenue base” for the country's 103 departmental councils, the assurance that no more transfer of charges would take place without “transfer of resources”, an increase in notary fees, or even greater control of the RSA, among other solid measures. For a stratum “not like the others”, deprived of fiscal leverage since the end of the housing tax but (poorly) armed arm of the State to manage child protection policies, aging or disability. Above all, Jean-Luc Gleyze asked the Prime Minister to reconsider the announced drains on their resources: the Departments must assume 44% (more than 2 billion euros) of the effort requested by the State from communities within the framework of a finance bill (PLF) denounced by elected officials for several weeks. The president of the Gironde departmental council (PS) expressed these “heavy demands” at the podium of the Assises des Départements de France, of which he is the leader of the left, at the end of last week. He returns “disappointed” and “angry”.

At the Assises des Départements de France, Friday November 15, Michel Barnier announced a “significant reduction” in the deductions planned by the PLF: don’t you think you have been heard?

The interest of the term “significant” is that it is not quantified… It leaves all hope or ensures all disappointment. But there will be a levy: if it is not the 2% announced on our operating revenue, it will be 1% or 0.5%… We wanted zero. I was expecting something strong. Michel Barnier told us that he “believes in the Departments”, that he wants us not to be “simple operators of the State”… And then, he talks to us about “the fight against absenteeism”, help in “taking charge of the costs” of nursing homes without really any explanation, accumulation of mandates… peripheral subjects. Raising the DMTO ceiling [les droits de mutation à titre onéreux, les fameux « frais de notaires » des transactions immobilières, l’une des principales ressources des Départements, NDLR] : we ask for 1%, we are told 0.5%, for three years. We are on the verge of fooling ourselves. I come home very angry and with the desire to continue the fight.

Comment ?

I dig up the hatchet again. The seriousness of the situation is commensurate with the specificities of our missions. I plan to relaunch the “defend our territories” mobilization, by bringing together hundreds of elected officials and citizens, as in December 2023. At the end of the week, we will install a huge tarpaulin on the “Gironde” building, in Bordeaux. , which will aim to challenge citizens and make people understand the issues, saying: “You are concerned by what is happening. » We will also do it on the networks, and with senators and ministries… I said it to Michel Barnier: I am not here to defend a square, but if we have to be eliminated by financial asphyxiation, who will take the relay? The State, which is in an abysmal deficit? Other communities, which will take over our missions and ask for the same resources? Because we will have to be up to the task: the children to be protected are there, the people are getting older, we must welcome them; there are disabilities to take care of, colleges and roads to maintain…

“I'm not here to defend a field, but if we have to be eliminated by financial asphyxiation, who will take over? »

What new revenues are you proposing, without having to create a new local tax?

I propose to increase the generalized social contribution (CSG) by 0.10 points, which would represent 2 billion euros, which we can direct to the Departments: this is part of the solution. I am also thinking of the special tax on insurance agreements, since we finance the fire services (Sdis) and thanks to the firefighters, there is precisely less property destroyed. The tourist tax can also be an answer. And then why not go get the revenue where it is found: we lost 60 billion euros in tax rebates to people who don't really need it. It is a political choice and a social choice. We cannot save money on public services forever.

In Gironde, what are the symptoms of this “asphyxia” that you denounce?

We lost 210 million euros in transfer rights in two years. For the 2025 budget, we must make 70 million euros in operational savings and 110 million in investment, and that, without the future measures of the PLF. We have no choice but to cut costs. We have already reduced our allocations to colleges. We have cut aid to municipalities and therefore aid to associations by half. Retiring people are not going to be replaced in the Department, even though we want to create positions to better ensure the monitoring of childminders and host families. Does the State want to suffocate the departmental public service and entrust it to the private sector tomorrow, for Orpéa nursing homes or People & Baby crèches?

Culture, sport, tourism, aid to municipalities: these are not compulsory skills and yet, you intervene in these areas in the name of a “voluntarist policy”…

But when we help a sports club to do disabled sports, is it sport or disability? When we finance measures to bring culture into nursing homes and help make them places to live, is that not helping the elderly? Tourism, aid to municipalities, it’s 15 million euros. Sport, culture, 7 or 8 million. We are looking for 180 million.

Some of your colleagues have threatened to suspend the payment of the RSA and the care of “unaccompanied minors”: would you go that far?

Rather than making us illegal by not taking care of unaccompanied minors, I prefer to obtain recognition of the State's debt. For children under protection or disabled adults, the State owes us 21 million euros. If necessary, we will go to litigation by putting the State in court. The RSA was 89% covered by the State and 11% by the Departments. Today it's 43-57. We gradually had a takeover by the State of the revenues allocated to us. We are no longer in the original spirit of decentralization, which consisted of choosing the right level of community for the right level of public action, with the resources that went with it. When we transferred child protection to the Departments, it was because we believed that it was the best local level to do it. What could the State do better than us today? Pointing the finger at us is deeply unfair.

What do the general public expect?

I want to demonstrate that public action serves lives and people. It shows what happens in practice if tomorrow, the Department no longer has the means to live up to its missions. If the Departments collapse, the whole nation falters. The abandonment of rural areas, we know what that produces. With all the corollary of social mobilizations, in the streets and in the votes.