Pension reform: three questions about the blocked vote used by the government in the Senate

Pension reform three questions about the blocked vote used by

Article 49.3 is now known to all. Will Article 44.3 of the Constitution enter common parlance in the same way? While the Minister of Labor, Olivier Dussopt, hoped to find in the corridors of the Senate a less strong opposition than in the National Assembly, the examination of the bill on pension reform is more eventful than expected. The government accuses the left of dragging out the debates. In a hurry to complete the examination of the text before midnight on Sunday March 12, he therefore drew 44.3 this Friday March 10. A particularly formidable constitutional weapon. Explanations.

44.3, what is it?

This device, valid both in the National Assembly and in the Senate, provides that “the seized assembly decides by a single vote on all or part of the text under discussion, retaining only the amendments proposed or accepted by the government”.

With the vote blocked, the opposition will no longer be able to vote for its own amendments and the examination of the bill will be at the initiative of the government. It is a question of presenting a single text on which the senators will have to decide, a way of preventing the parliamentary discussion from drifting into additional subjects or falling into parliamentary obstruction.

Why is the government using blocked voting?

Since the start of the week, Olivier Dussopt has pointed to “a methodical opposition” from the left, which he holds responsible for the slowness of the debates. “We have noticed a characteristic and systematic desire on the left to obstruct with similar amendments and as many explanations of vote. Only to save time”, he justified himself.

If it is clearly a show of force from the minister, the device should have no effect on the duration of the debates. The session chair Nathalie Delattre reminded that each of the thousand remaining amendments can be defended.

To speed up the discussion, the government can always rely on another device which resides in the constitution. In the previous paragraph, 44-2, it is possible for the executive to “oppose the examination of any amendment which has not been previously submitted to the Commission”. The Minister of Labor had used this provision on Thursday evening to dismiss many amendments from left-wing senators on Article 9. Thus, all sub-amendments tabled in the evening that had not been submitted beforehand were deemed inadmissible. .

What are the reactions of the opposition?

The government’s maneuver was received differently. On the left, the environmentalist, rebellious and socialist senators denounced an “admission of weakness” or a “coup of force”. “We will go to the end so that this text is not put to the vote”, promised the presidents of the groups of these political forces gathered for a joint speech. The challenge rose beyond the Senate and did not just target the executive.

The leader of rebellious France Jean-Luc Mélenchon strongly attacked the right-wing senators whom he considers guilty of having made a pact with the government to speed up the debates: “Blocked vote imposed on the Senate. Only the simpletons of LR could believe in dialogue with Macron. Domesticated Retailleau. At the Assembly, Ciotti can go and buy his leash.” He criticizes the right for not opposing the government in order to adopt the decline in the retirement age from 62 to 64, demanded by the group Les Républicains for several weeks.

“Dear colleagues on the left, you are overplaying indignation,” replied Bruno Retailleau, president of the LR group in the Senate. “The application of the blocked vote is the Constitution, it is not an illiberal application of our fundamental law”, he continues, adding that “the cause [du déclenchement]it is your obstruction”.



lep-life-health-03