HomePoliticsOrdinances, voting by deputies... The different scenarios that may or may not...

Ordinances, voting by deputies… The different scenarios that may or may not lead to a suspension of the pension reform

To convince the socialists not to censure him, Sébastien Lecornu announced on October 14 that he would propose to Parliament the suspension of the pension reform. However, the adoption of this measure, integrated into the Social Security budget, is not guaranteed. Explanations.

But what will become of the suspension of the pension reform, announced by Sébastien Lecornu to the socialists last week, before the latter loudly proclaim a “victory”? This is the question that is on everyone’s lips in the political world in recent weeks. Because the legislative path for the measure to succeed is far from obvious. It could even be unpublished.

The only certainty for the moment: the suspension will be examined within the framework of the social security financing bill (PLFSS), which deputies will examine next Monday in committee. It will form part of the initial copy of this text and will not be proposed through an amendment, as the Government initially wished.

In fact, the Socialist Party asked to integrate it directly into the bill through a “letter of amendment,” ratified this Thursday during a specially convened Council of Ministers. This change seems like a detail, but it could become very important for the suspension of the pension reform to be adopted if the budget is approved by ordinance.

Be careful to cling to the many parliamentary and constitutional niceties that will follow.

• Recipes

The first, the simplest: the ordinances allow all budget modalities to be adopted by the Council of Ministers and not by Parliament. The Government can resort to it through article 47 of the Constitution if the examination deadlines set for the financial texts are not respected (70 for the State budget, 50 for the Social Security budget).

The problem: Since the ordinances have never been used in financial texts, no one really knows which version might be preserved. The one voted by Parliament or the initial copy of the Government? Hence the importance for the socialists, who feared a “farce”, that the suspension of the pension reform was included in the initial PLFSS and was not proposed by amendment.

Therefore, they will be able to adopt it during the debates in the Assembly – there is a majority in favor of this thanks to the other left-wing parties and the National Group – without fearing that the suspension will disappear from the text in the event that ordinances are resorted to and the initial text is approved.

That said, why could this scenario, albeit unprecedented in the history of the Fifth Republic, come true? For a simple reason: nothing says that parliamentarians will examine the budget on time. Indeed, Sébastien Lecornu will not be able to shorten the debates thanks to article 49.3 of the Constitution, which he has renounced, although other means will continue to exist to speed up the parliamentary procedure, such as the “blocked vote”.

In any case, a vote by the National Assembly and then the Senate would not be enough to rule out a possible blockade. Nothing of the sort. A mixed commission (CMP) would surely be convened, which would bring together seven deputies and seven senators, to find a common text, in the absence of a prior agreement between the two chambers of Parliament.

In this case, several obstacles would arise on the path to government. First, would the CMP be conclusive? In other words, will the right and the presidential side, which can combine to be in a position of strength in this case, manage to get along? This is a delicate issue, since the Les Républicains party is widely divided in its strategy towards the government.

Let’s admit yes. The Bourbon Palace and the Luxembourg Palace would still have to decide on the resulting version of the CMP. However, in the National Assembly, the government has a relative majority position, even with the support of LR deputies.

Hence the possibility of stagnating and then resorting to ordinances… However, the option would surely be very costly politically for a government that boasts of ceding control to Parliament by abandoning 49.3.

Would he escape after censorship?

• The special law

If Parliament failed to vote on the budget on time, ordinances would not be the only tool available to Sébastien Lecornu. The Prime Minister could resort to a special law. This allows the State to collect existing taxes and therefore avoid a US-style “shutdown.”

This exceptional situation occurred in the recent past. On December 4, 2024, a motion of censure was adopted, filed after an appeal to 49.3 of the PLFSS. Consequence: not only were Michel Barnier, then Prime Minister, and his government overthrown, but the text was also rejected.

So France is left without a budget. Parliament adopted a special law ten days later.

Then, two months later, the budget texts were duly adopted under the leadership of François Bayrou, who had obtained the non-censorship of the Socialist Party.

The fact is that if a special law were approved, the suspension of the pension reform would fall by the wayside.

• Approval of the budget in Parliament

In any case, there is no doubt that Sébastien Lecornu would prefer to avoid this potentially costly solution for France’s financial stability.

Another scenario is possible: voting on the budget on time. Several conditions, and not the least, for this: firstly, that the parliamentarians speak out within the deadlines set for the Assembly and the Senate.

As mentioned above, a copy of the CMP would potentially have to be voted on. Will LR and the presidential side be willing to accept that the suspension of the pension reform continues to appear in the final text? If so, the main difficulty remains: how to obtain a copy of the CMP adopted by the Assembly for a government in a situation of relative majority and deprived of 49.3?

Obtaining the goodwill of the socialists, if the suspension of the pension reform is still present? High risk dilemma. Because the current budget includes many other measures, including many inconveniences for the PS between the doubling of medicine cabinet franchises, the freezing of retirement pensions and the elimination of nearly 4,000 teaching positions.

In the best of cases, the Prime Minister could count on his abstention, in case he does not obtain a favorable vote, which is all the more unlikely since the different opposition groups traditionally vote against budget texts.

“For the text to be approved, if all the other members of the opposition oppose it, the socialists are obliged to vote in favor of the budget. If the PS only wants to abstain, in this case it is necessary that the environmentalists and the communists also abstain and that the republican deputies vote in favor,” summarized political scientist Olivier Rozenberg in Mediapart this Monday.

Suffice it to say that the mission is not far from impossible.

There remains one last possibility: to propose a specific bill for the suspension of the pension reform. This option was never mentioned directly by Sébastien Lecornu, but perhaps it could allow him to buy time with the Socialists.

Author: baptista farge
Source: BFM TV

Stay Connected
16,985FansLike
2,458FollowersFollow
61,453SubscribersSubscribe
Must Read
Related News

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here