Immigration, education, Ukraine… In a river interview at Point, Emmanuel Macron provides an overview of the news for his political comeback. And unveils his famous “major political initiative” promised at the beginning of the month: the Head of State will receive on August 30 the leaders of all the political forces represented in Parliament, in order to find agreements “useful for France “.
Former minister and LR mayor of Meaux, Jean-François Copé, also a columnist at L’Express, is reserved on the presidential initiative. “The original sin of this five-year term is the absence of an absolute majority in the National Assembly”, he judges, regretting the absence of political recomposition in the aftermath of the legislative elections. On the other hand, he salutes the position of the Head of State on the Ukrainian file, far from the recent declarations of Nicolas Sarkozy.
L’Express: Emmanuel Macron has chosen to express himself in the written press, at the dawn of the new school year. What is your overall view of this interview?
Jean-Francois Cope: The maintenance is of a very good standard. Emmanuel Macron shows what differentiates populists from men of government. The first reason by successive simplisms, the second show that the problems are complex and require long-term answers. I share his diagnosis on the three upheavals – geopolitical, climatic and digital – which jeopardize our democracies entangled in inefficiency.
Emmanuel Macron will organize a “transpartisan” meeting on August 30 in order to build “useful agreements” on several subjects. This is the “major political initiative” mentioned this summer by the Head of State. Did the elephant give birth to a mouse?
I didn’t expect anything spectacular. For a simple reason: he does not have the political means. The original sin of this five-year term is the absence of an absolute majority in the National Assembly. This equation imposes itself on Emmanuel Macron, it is the very definition of the Fifth Republic. Without an absolute majority, the system does not work. We have been paying for this since the day after the legislative elections, for lack of having recomposed a new majority more to the right and corresponding to the expectations of the French.
In this interview, the Head of State draws a parallel between the current situation and the period 1958-1962. Historically, this is incorrect. There was an absolute – albeit composite – majority in order to give General de Gaulle a free hand to settle the Algerian crisis. And then, Emmanuel Macron is not de Gaulle.
Emmanuel Macron assures not to be prevented by the state of relative majority. He evokes the “vote” of the pension reform “and the adoption of nearly 50 texts…
Calm down ! The reforming capacity of a government is not measured by the number of laws but by their importance. However, we do not honor the big appointments, such as the reform of the State, the school or the modernization of our health system. Everything is blocked. Firstly because there were no personalities at the head of these ministries capable of imposing a real transformation, which is a deliberate choice by Macron. Then, because the president was re-elected on a program essentially centered around pension reform. There is no other guideline. Here he is, therefore, forced a year later to propose a roadmap without popular legitimacy and without an absolute majority. Nice challenge!
The Head of State assures that no “parliamentary coalition” is possible because of the divisions within the Republicans (LR). It’s hard to fault him…
He is right. By opposing a brutal “niet” the day after the legislative elections to the chance to govern and impose our ideas, the leaders of LR bear a strong responsibility in the current situation. Some are evolving today, but I’m afraid it’s too late. There are “momentums” in political history, it’s more complicated today. The past year has given wings to those who wanted to make personal publicity, as during the review of the pension reform.
You mention the “niet” of LR. But Emmanuel Macron has never really reached out to the right…
Absolutely. The responsibility is shared between LR and Emmanuel Macron, who never wanted to carry this political reconfiguration. The French had nevertheless claimed it by their vote! In this case, everyone succumbed to a sin of pride.
Emmanuel Macron judges that the tripartition of political life is “destined to last”. It integrates the social democrats or the republican right into the central bloc. Is it healthy democratically to have a block that brings together so many tendencies?
My analysis is the opposite of that of Emmanuel Macron. I believe in the right-left divide within the governing parties. The current situation is inexorably opening up a boulevard to the far right, for lack of an alternative. Candidatures are likely to multiply within the Republican arc, with a division of votes which prevents any qualification in the second round of the presidential election.
“The announcements of referendums, it is to occupy the television news!”
The president assures that referendum projects could emanate from the transpartisan meeting of August 30. “I intend to use this tool,” he says. Do you approve of this approach?
I have no sympathy for referendums. They are machines to lose and slap, I saw it in 2005. Few referendums have been won since 1969. The risk of personal disavowal hangs over any question submitted to referendum, which jeopardizes the future defended ideas. One should not play Russian roulette on fundamental subjects. Furthermore, it is the negation of “representative democracy” whose opposite, “direct democracy”, always opens the door to dictatorship. Remember, Robespierre and the guillotine… But referendum announcements are to occupy the television news! All political leaders promise them, but they are not implemented.
The Head of State affirms that we must “significantly reduce immigration, starting with illegal immigration”. Do you need to approve?
I draw a parallel between his new voluntarism in matters of immigration and that in matters of security. He can draw all he wants from satisfactory balance sheets, but the facts are there: illegal immigration is totally uncontrolled; the explosion of drug trafficking leads to an absolutely unprecedented level of violence in France against which the president shows no modus operandi.
With regard to immigration, a bill must be examined this fall. Doesn’t LR’s intransigence – who demands the adoption of his own project – make any compromise illusory?
I understand this intransigence. The regal part of the text is good, but its component on economic immigration will result in regularizing entire channels of illegal immigrants. The right is here taken hostage to please the left wing of the majority. When we do that, we kill the project. It is the caricature of “at the same time”, as if we were doing everything so that LR does not vote for the text.
Basically, LR does not want to help Macron because the party considers that he never made the gestures he should have made or designated the men or women with whom he should have worked. Politics is made up of words, daily practices and personal attentions. Appointing a Prime Minister on the left and hardly experienced in political dialogue is a casting error which makes any favorable outcome very difficult. Everything has been done so that bridgeheads cannot be established. All this is a huge mess, while France so badly needs major sovereign reforms.
To follow you, we left for four years of immobility.
I only ask to be wrong.
Emmanuel Macron defines education as the “reserved domain” of the President of the Republic. This formula traditionally refers to defense or foreign affairs. Are you in phase?
This formula is not acceptable. Most of the educational reforms go through the law, the work of national representation. On the other hand, I am satisfied to finally see a roadmap on the school, even if it is wrong to brush aside the major problem that is the single college: a machine of permanent inequalities according to the districts where the students live.
On the other hand, there is a reserved area: nuclear power. In this interview, Emmanuel Macron shows astonishing bad faith, like François Hollande. When you hear them, you get the impression that nuclear power has never done so well as between 2012 and 2022! They have nevertheless assumed and publicly promised the dismantling of the sector. Emmanuel Macron did not save but devitalized nuclear power until 2022 and Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. Suffice to say that his 180 degree turn since is a relief.
“History must be taught chronologically,” assures the president. Do you approve of this ad?
Yes. The chronological teaching of history is absolutely major. Without it we lose essential fundamentals for understanding our identity but also the present and the future. I prefer this announcement by Emmanuel Macron to his clumsy tribute to warlord Pétain or to his so incomplete remarks on colonization.
Emmanuel Macron finally recalls the “sovereignty” of the Ukrainian people and distances himself from Nicolas Sarkozy’s analysis. The latter assures that Ukraine must remain “neutral” and cannot join either the EU or NATO. He even mentions referendums in “the disputed territories of eastern and southern Ukraine”. What does this position inspire in you?
Emmanuel Macron was right to reframe Nicolas Sarkozy. It is likely that the day will come to speak to Putin again. But the indulgence of the former president towards him, like that of Le Pen or Mélenchon, is incomprehensible. Such remarks by a personality from the republican arc and belonging to a family of thought attached to human rights, territorial integrity on the European continent and respect for international law are very disturbing.
This analysis could have been accepted before the invasion of Ukraine. At the time, the idea of seeking a “modus vivendi” with the Russian president could be agreed. Especially since Sarkozy and Hollande have made enormous concessions. Sarkozy de facto gave up 30% of Georgia when he presided over the EU; Hollande and Merkel made big concessions in Crimea. Does it remind you of anything? Yes Macron is right, we must rehabilitate the knowledge of history. In particular that of the first half of the 20th century… At least for those who have a weak memory.