A new sequence under high tension opens this week at the National Assembly. At the heart of the attention of the deputies, a text of cancellation of the retirement at 64 years old supported by the oppositions. He will be in committee on Wednesday then June 8 in the hemicycle.
Who defends this text?
The independent group Liot (Freedoms, Independents, Overseas Territories and Territories) and its 21 deputies tabled this repeal bill, which is on the Assembly’s agenda for June 8, a day dedicated to texts of the group (“niche”). His boss Bertrand Pancher wishes to offer a “top exit” to the “very serious social and political crisis” generated by the pension reform.
Among the supporters of the Liot proposal, the left, the RN and some LR. On June 8, it has a chance of being adopted at first reading, given the simple relative majority available to the presidential camp. Hence the commotion in macronie, against a text accused of “irresponsible”, “unconstitutional” and without future. “It’s not serious to want to have a catch-up session pretending that we could make a pension reform in a few hours”, repeated Sunday May 28 Elisabeth Borne.
What does this repeal text say?
Its article 1 provides for returning to retirement at 62, erasing the planned schedule for raising the legal retirement age from September 1 (by three months per year until 2030). The calendar for extending the contribution period would also be revised.
Article 2 proposes a “pension system financing conference” before December 31, involving the State, social partners, citizens and qualified personalities. It would be a question of finding other solutions in order to guarantee the balance of the regimes. Finally, usual trick of parliamentarians to ensure the admissibility of their proposals: a last article provides for an increase in tobacco tax to compensate for the loss of revenue for Social Security, because of this text of law. But “this pledge on the packet of cigarettes does not hold” because the price increase would be dizzying, sweeps a government source.
How is the presidential camp defending itself?
The presidential camp has been brandishing article 40 of the Constitution for several weeks, which specifies that parliamentary initiatives are not admissible if they aggravate public charges. However, the Liot text has already passed a first filter, being deemed admissible when it was tabled by a delegation from the office of the Assembly, traditionally quite flexible.
In view of the debates on Wednesday in the Social Affairs Committee, its president Fadila Khattabi (Renaissance) posed the question of admissibility to her counterpart in Finance, the LFI Eric Coquerel. The latter will present Tuesday at 10:30 a.m. at a press conference in the Assembly his response, which will be a confirmation: he refuses to undermine the “right of the opposition”, also at constitutional level. But article 40 can be mobilized at any time, and the macronists have not said their last word.
What should we expect?
More than 80 amendments have been tabled by MPs from all sides for the meeting at 9:30 a.m. Including amendments from the presidential majority to delete Article 1, which are likely to be approved thanks to a balance of power favorable to it in committee. The bill thus emptied of its substance would be validated.
In view of the session of June 8, the oppositions should naturally try to restore this key article repealing the 64 years, via new amendments. The macronists have their plan all tied up: these amendments would be declared inadmissible by the President of the Assembly Yaël Braun-Pivet who will then have the hand. Thus on June 8, there would be no possibility of voting for repeal.
What other scenarios?
The presidential majority does not have the guarantee that everything will go as it wishes, and a mobilization of the inter-union on June 6 will put the pressure. Among the other tricks up its sleeve, the executive will be able to play the card of another article of the Constitution during the session, 44.3 allowing the “blocked vote”: it would consist in putting the Liot text to the vote without its article 1 – text so take it or leave it.
Moreover, government as majority will be able to use the obstruction to prevent the debates from going to their end. With the aim of holding out until midnight, the ax time in the hemicycle… but at the risk of again pointing at the 64-year-old protesters. Even in the event of final adoption at the end of a parliamentary course with pitfalls, the Liot text “would ultimately be canceled by the Constitutional Council”, does not budge Elisabeth Borne. Bertrand Pancher would not fail to him also, with other oppositions, to seize the Sages.