Pensions: the consequences of 49.3 will be heavy, by Anne Rosencher

Pensions the consequences of 493 will be heavy by Anne

Everyone remembers Emmanuel Macron’s sentence in the second round of the last presidential election: “This vote obliges me”. By this formula, the newly re-elected president noted that “many compatriots had voted for him not to support his ideas but to block those of the far right”. It’s just. We could have added that what compelled her even more, perhaps, was elsewhere: in the fact that Marine Le Pen had improved her score between the last two presidential elections, going from 33.9% to 41.5% of the vote cast, i.e. from 10.6 million votes to 13.3 million. Significant anger was expressed – still contained, at the ballot box, by the repelling effect of the Lepenist heritage, and by the serious doubts about the competence of the candidate. But the evidence of a deeper and deeper fracture was before our eyes. And, yes, she “obligated” the president. A month later, the situation got even worse: the vote of the French in the legislative elections deprived Emmanuel Macron of a majority in the Assembly. Anger and disarray had made their way despite the electoral mechanics, however not very “proportional” of our two-round majority ballot.

This is why, to tell the truth, this pension reform, as it was thought out, and (very badly) put together, was extremely confusing from the start. At first, the government already seemed to hesitate as to the explanatory memorandum. The Pensions Orientation Council repeating over and over that the balance of the system was not in danger in the short term, several ministers suggested that it was in fact above all a question of finding budgetary leeway after several years of whatever it takes. Even that France, with its 6.1% public deficit (2021) had to give some pledges to Brussels, the IMF and the markets, which risked losing patience with the cicadas in berets…

This was completely “unsaleable”: the categories of French people affected by the pension reform already feeling the wronged of the last decades of globalization and European bureaucracy. Thus posed, the debate was bound to focus on the distribution of the effort, and on the need or not to increase taxes (which Emmanuel Macron has undertaken not to do). Everything, afterwards, was in keeping. As the weeks went by, the reform seemed to reveal hidden defects and shams that the government, caught at fault, was trying to correct, to amend until it turned the whole thing into a “gas factory”, and the reform into a fixation point, all carrying mountains of political energy and social anger. Was it worth it?

Last act, therefore: 49.3. Of course, it will be argued that this tool is provided for by the Constitution, and that is absolutely correct. There is nothing illegal there. However, the fact that this remedy is constitutional in no way guarantees that it will be politically acceptable to citizens. That is up to them to decide. Has the government fully measured it? “Everyone, sooner or later, sits down to a banquet of consequences,” wrote Robert Louis Stevenson. The consequences of 49.3 will be heavy. Because the fracture is already deep, and the resentment, important.

lep-life-health-03