Two months to get out of the crisis and resuscitate a five-year term sluggish. The executive is advance on a field of mines at the dawn of the great national debate. The consultation is akin to a leap into the unknown, both the questions are many : the French are they going to take ownership of the exercise? The organisation will she be up to? The impartiality of the debate will be does it have warranty? These sixty days of dialogue, on a background of weekly events, is a bet for the government.
Listen to Christophe Barbier welcome the beginning of the great debate and hope that it will be a good place (on SoundCloud).
The executive place and yet the bar high, leaves to fall in the emphasis. “Your suggestions will build a new contract for the Nation, to structure the action of the government and parliament, but also the positions of France at european and international level”, writes Emmanuel Macron in his Letter to the French. The head of the State will give itself this Tuesday we kick off this debate on the occasion of a trip to Grand Bourgtheroulde, in the Eure. But this solemnity has a corollary. The executive must demonstrate that the debate is not a gadget and take concrete steps, visible. “This is the main issue,” says The Express, the member of parliament of The Republic of the Hérault Patrick Vignal.
Not a session “psychotherapy collective”
A requirement that will be much stronger in the case of massive participation in the discussions. A response timorous of the executive was likely to increase the frustration of the yellow vests, called by the government to abandon the mobilization of street for the dialogue. “This ‘landing’ of the debate will be capital, confirmed a parliamentary majority. It will not take the citizens for fools.”
one of The vice-presidents of the national Assembly, Hugues renson explained, cautions against the simple “session of psychotherapy collective” and argues for “two or three reforms on each theme of the consultation.” For its part, the government spokesman Benjamin Griveaux promised Tuesday to concrete realizations “by mid-April”.
READ ALSO >> Macron can it still appeal to them?
The executive advance yet on a ridge line. While playing the card of listening and proximity, it has already drawn red lines : no question of weakening the reforms undertaken since the summer of 2017, still less a change of course. The equation, subtle, is summed up by Emmanuel Macron himself in his letter to the French: “I have not forgotten that I was elected on a project, on major orientations to which I remain faithful ( … ), But I also think that this debate can come out with a clarification of our national project and european level, new ways of looking at the future, new ideas.” In this context, the discussion in Parliament of the texts on the territorial organisation and the law of orientation on the mobility has been pushed back, in order to take into account the results of the consultation.
The government is on a ridge line
Listen, therefore, without loses : this balance is particularly difficult to hold on to the economic and social issues, which are of little consensus. The government has already closed the door to a return of the tax on wealth (ISF) and the complete removal of the housing tax has sparked an imbroglio. A parliamentary majority has asked, under the cover of anonymity, on the real interest of the debate, since these filters installed into the game.
ALSO READ >> property Tax: a tangle of government in three acts
“politics is The art of sail, defends the mp LREM Rhone Bruno Bonnell. It may pull to the right or the left as long as the cap remains the same. There is no single way to achieve it. The ISF, for example, is a bad tax, but we can think of a way to make more participate the more affluent social justice”.
the deputy of the Haute-Vienne that Jean-Baptiste Djebbari, to him, evokes the taxation of transmissions of large estates. In favour of the responses “substantial”, it also cautions, however : “The measures taken must not lead to deficit or paupériser the country. There must be reasonable answers and not to give in to give up.”
A referendum to be multiple choice?
the question Remains “democratic”, one of the four themes of the debate. The movement of the yellow vests, has highlighted the aspiration for more participatory democracy. “It is necessary to work on the concept of ‘continuing democracy’, analysis mp MoDem Erwan Balanant (Finistère). How do I ensure that every citizen has claimed to be a citizen between the different elections, without interruption.” Anxious to meet these expectations, the government has therefore also postponed the review of the reform of the institutions.
In the majority, some voices plead for the organization of a referendum on multiple issues. It would incorporate the main guidelines of the project (reduction in the number of mps, dose of proportional representation…), as well as the proposals emerging from the debate, such as the taking into account of the white vote. In an interview with Media Centre, the member LREM Sacha Houlié evokes the date of 26 may, the day of the european elections. “There would, then, parallel to the election of the european, a newsletter yes newsletter and not for every question asked”, ensures the responsible for the revision of the constitution within the majority.
This track does not, however, unanimous. Some parliamentarians RLEM are skeptical and fear that the vote does not turn to the referendum anti-Macron. Marked by the memory of the vote of 2005 on the european Constitution, Hugues renson explained, former adviser to Jacques Chirac, called for “prudence”. Others lend themselves to the opposite of the virtues political in the referendum, in a context of crisis. “A referendum would be useful and desirable if it is a strong demand that appears at the debate, said Jean-Baptiste Djebbari. There is a need of breathing democratic. The referendum allows relégitimer the government and to renew the licence to govern.”
Read our complete file
Who are the guarantors designated to certify the great debate? What can we expect of the great debate on secularism? National debate: only a French three account to participate