François Bayrou announced it: he will remain mayor of Pau in addition to being Prime Minister. “We made a mistake by making local and national responsibilities incompatible,” he said. And for writer and editor Arthur Chevallier, it's a courageous choice.
François Bayrou starts well. The ban on multiple mandates is populism. Being mayor allows you to stay in touch with everyday politics, voters, and the concrete problems of the French. In short, it allows you to keep your feet on the ground. The crisis of democracy also comes from the disconnection of politicians.
On paper, the idea of non-cumulation is not bad. It was supposed to renew the political staff. There was also a high rate of absenteeism in the Assembly. The deputies were held back by their local obligations. It was a problem, it's true. In 2012, 82% of deputies were in a cumulative situation. So we passed a law in 2014 which prohibits the accumulation of a local executive function, mayor for example, and a parliamentary mandate.
Result: MPs are cut off from the field and have a weaker relationship with their voters. Mayor and deputy, these are complementary functions. When it's the same person, it's effective. If they are two different people, they need to get along and cooperate. Problem: this is not always the case. And in the end, it is the voter who toasts.
The clear opinion of Arthur Chevallier: François Bayrou reopens the debate on the accumulation of mandates – 17/12
The accumulation of mandates, an old debate
Accumulation is an old debate. At the beginning, the slowness of the means of communication makes it very complicated anyway. Paris and the provinces are a little cut off. The accumulation began under the reign of King Louis-Philippe, in 1830. The deputies understood that having local roots helped them to be elected at the national level. In 1840, 50% of the deputies were also general councilors. This will increase in the 19th century. Accumulation goes hand in hand with the figure of the notable, that is to say the provincial elected official, who knows ministers and who reports problems to Paris. It was the choice of efficiency, not of virtue.
And that suits everyone, actually. Under the Third Republic, in 1876, the statistics are the same. Approximately 50% of deputies have a local mandate. We are already thinking about the limitation of mandates, but that concerns the accumulation between deputies and senators… Limitation as we understand it today, it starts late. With a law of 1985, which prohibits the accumulation of a parliamentary mandate with more than one local or European mandate.
The voters are divided. According to a 2024 Ifop survey, 46% are for, 54% are against. But let's go beyond these numbers. There has been a fairly strict accumulation for 10 years. Do you have the impression that the French have more confidence in politics than before? The accumulation is not the only culprit, but that didn't help much. So it was populism, that is to say something to amuse the gallery which served no purpose. We surely have better things to do.
