Who the hell should you listen to? Who the hell should you believe? Is it Emmanuel Macron, who trumpeted a little over a year and a half ago, right between the two rounds of the presidential election in his speech in Marseille, that this “five-year term will be ecological or will not be”? Is it Emmanuel Macron who, in front of the mayors of France, has, on several occasions according to Politico, described the Ademe campaign for Black Friday as “bullshit”? No doubt both one and the other. At the same time. In any case, this is what the Head of State, devoted defender of the sense of nuance, fervent activist of gradation, must be convinced of. But by adapting to its audiences, to contingencies, to its thematic political sequences – the “ecology” week succeeding the “industrialization” week, itself succeeding the “revitalization of the economy” week… -, the nuance is sometimes on the verge of transforming into ambivalence. It is not the first time. But it’s been six years now…
Let’s recap. The Elysée, Matignon and the ministers of Bercy – including the first concerned Bruno Le Maire and the minister responsible for VSEs, SMEs, Crafts and Tourism Olivia Grégoire – discovered, with wide eyes, the new campaign of the Environment and energy management agency (Ademe) against overconsumption, launched the day before Black Friday. We can see, in particular, a “reseller” advising a customer not to buy new polo shirts in a store, since his is in perfect condition… In short, an ode to sobriety. Let us remember “the end of abundance”, says Emmanuel Macron, which marks our new era in full upheaval. Validated upstream by the Minister of Ecological Transition Christophe Béchu, the four spots created a wave of protest among local merchant associations, including Michel-Edouard Leclerc, whose brands, it is well known, promote French textiles, the circuit runs and fight with all their might against “fast fashion”.
“We are not going to do ecology against people”
Within the Ministry of the Economy too, we are strangling ourselves. On Franceinfo, Bruno Le Maire described the campaign as “clumsiness”, arguing that staging in physical stores played into the hands of digital platforms; Olivia Grégoire’s phone has been ringing continuously for two days. Everyone defends their customers, especially at a time when the President of the Republic concludes a week devoted to the economic life and competitiveness of the country. One more episode in the tumultuous relations between the Ministry of Ecology and Bercy: just leaf through the book by journalist Justine Reix, Powder in the eyes (JC Lattès), to get an idea of their divergent, even contradictory, ambitions. “We must realize that these subjects distress the French, we must be responsible, we are not going to engage in ecology against people, we must take them on board”, consider those in Bruno Le Maire’s entourage, where fads that resemble a form of degrowth do not get much good press. A proof, also, of the quality of the oil which makes the cogs of the different components of the government work… “It still raises the question of general management, slips a full-time minister who confirms the ire of the Elysée and Matignon. Why isn’t all this more interministerialized? Even with Bercy, they have flaws, but all the same…”
Since governing is not only planning but also establishing priorities, it is wise to ask the question of those of the government and Emmanuel Macron. Growth and full employment? The ecological shift? By publicly mocking the spots validated by Christophe Béchu without subsequently taking care to have his remarks qualified by his Elysian teams, the head of state chose his side. “Pragmatic ecology”, as we often chant in macronie? We still need to know its contours. Its meaning. In the light of this new governmental adventure, and the previous ones, we can venture a definition: who says “pragmatic” says “who does not bother the French”, to elegantly paraphrase Georges Pompidou. With the exception of the totemic pension reform, the executive seems to have this motto as a guideline, a remainder, in particular, of the yellow vest movement. Too bad if this means discrediting a Minister of Ecology who, for once, had broken the sound barrier (and ignored Matignon’s instructions to remove pro-sobriety spots). Too bad if their main message, and crucial for any good, self-respecting ecological policy, is impoverished. Who ever said that you had to know how to “take your risk”?