2023-09-07 06:42:59
Subject: An essential reform of the 2014 law on the social and solidarity economy (ESS)
Ladies and gentlemen deputies, ladies and gentlemen senators,
On July 31, 2014, law no. 2014-856 relating to the social and solidarity economy was adopted. This law was a real step forward for institutional and political recognition of the SSE, starting with specifying its scope: associations, cooperatives, mutuals and foundations make it up by virtue of their status, but also certain commercial companies subject to that they are recognized as being of social utility, with limited profit-making and participatory governance.
Almost ten years later, the Government decided to launch the evaluation of this law. Work has already been initiated in this direction within the Higher Council of the SSE, resulting in a report formulating proposals likely to consolidate public policies, regulatory, fiscal and financial systems for companies in the ‘ESS. There is no doubt that it will be able to contribute usefully to your parliamentary work to improve the legal framework and the support mechanisms for the SSE.
However, yielding to the influence of paradoxical corporatisms in a sector that claims to be innovative and progressive, this report deliberately neglects some major questions:
Why is the SSE, which legitimately aims to be at the heart of the social and ecological challenges of this century, still and always remains so little visible and readable by the general public, the media and political and economic decision-makers?
Why has the share of the SSE in the economy and in employment not progressed or even slightly regressed in 10 years?
Why has a growing number of SSE companies adopted since the Pacte law, the status of “company with a mission”, as if claiming to be part of the SSE was not enough for them to affirm and advance their social and environmental utility?
The answer is twofold.
On the one hand, the SSE did not benefit from sufficient support from public authorities; however, this economy of tomorrow will not happen without the State clearly providing its support to SSE actors, through a programming law and through tax advantages in particular. On the territories, the actors of the SSE show that a path reconciling economic performance and general interest is possible: the public authorities must support them, within a framework laid down by law, which the 2014 law does not specify enough.
On the other hand, and this is a prerequisite, the SSE must be defined with more stringency, so that the State knows precisely to whom and why it is providing its support. Indeed, in its historical construction, the SSE is first defined as a mode of entrepreneurship advocating collective, democratic corporate governance, an alternative to capitalism. But for any alternative that it claims to be, this mode of entrepreneurship actually says very little about the social impact, even less about the ecological impact, and it does not yet sufficiently specify the sharing of wealth to be achieved at inside the companies since no mode of limitation of the remunerations is envisaged to condition the membership of the SSE.
Of course, the SSE identifies a number of companies carrying social and ecological innovation, a number of players in solidarity, social cohesion, support for the most vulnerable, or even pioneers of the circular economy or professional integration: everyone knows these emblematic organizations, which are the Red Cross, APF-France Handicap, Emmaüs, Biocoop, Enercoop… and many others which are the cement of our society, or which prefigure our production methods and future consumption at a time of sobriety.
However, the SSE also includes companies – and not the least in terms of turnover – which are at the very least far from the previous ones as well as from the promise of embodying “the economy of tomorrow”, both by the lack of solidarity and not very ecological of their activities, than by their economic and social model. To be convinced of this, it suffices to examine the census lists of SSE companies kept by the CRESS1: there you will find certain agricultural cooperative groups whose activities, which are not very social and ecological, make the headlines in the media and even in the courts, until recently inspired a series on Arte. We will also find cooperatives or mutuals whose practices are far removed from the historical values of “one man, one vote”, or at the level of remuneration of their leaders, which has nothing to envy to the most capital-intensive companies. We will also find SSE companies among the 50 most CO2-emitting French companies invited to the Élysée in November 2022, or even a cooperative network of more than 130 gunsmiths! Is this, then, a social and solidarity economy? So is this the “desirable standard of tomorrow’s economy”?
Today, the legal scope of the SSE is almost exclusively based on legal status. Regardless of the social or environmental utility of the activity, the conditions for internal sharing of wealth, the status of association, cooperative, mutual fund or foundation is sufficient in itself to be an SSE enterprise. We therefore understand the problems of coherence and readability of the SSE which condemn it to the margins while it aims to become the norm. The evaluation of the law cannot therefore do without a reform of the criteria that define an organization of the SSE so that the SSE is finally understandable, reveals its transforming power and constitutes a solid reference in the face of social and greenwashing that flourish within it. It is essential to provide all the means for more ambitious public policies.
Thus, since the SSE claims to be a force for social and ecological progress, why not introduce into law the obligation – at a minimum – to set social and environmental objectives for all its organizations?
Similarly, since the SSE claims to be a force for the reduction of social inequalities, why does it not set an example through a legal framework for the remuneration of the directors of its largest companies, by aligning it at least with this what are public companies already obliged to do since 2012, i.e. a maximum remuneration of €450,000 gross annually? From trade unions, NGOs, economists and the media to public opinion, there are now many voices raising the issue of the excessive remuneration of business leaders as an issue of social cohesion. Why should the economy described as “social and solidarity” not be at the forefront of this aspiration for social justice?
Our proposals, if they are today in the minority within the current bodies representing the heads of the SSE networks, are undeniably supported by the actors in the field of the SSE and by arguments to which French citizens are obviously sensitive. It is enough to ask around, to realize that most of our fellow citizens are convinced that a social and solidarity economy “naturally” carries these principles and criteria. And also to note their astonishment when they learn that this is far from being the case in practice for certain large brands.
Consequently, a reform of the law of July 31, 2014, and especially that of its article 1 defining its companies, is essential as evidence in order to bring coherence to the legal definition of the SSE and its story, and finally ensure its notoriety as well as its development; thanks to the preference of consumers as well as a particularly ambitious public policy offering all the advantages (taxation, subsidies, preference in public procurement, promotion, etc.) to SSE companies whose social utility and contribution to the interest will finally be clearly and fully defined, without contradictions or ambiguities.
It is this clarification, this requirement and this increased transparency, paving the way towards a more social, ecological and united economy, and better supported, which are now in your hands. A demanding and coherent SSE would finally set a real example for the entire economy to follow, and would be a decisive partner for public authorities.
Hoping to have been heard, we remain at your disposal for any meeting or useful hearing, and to share our work to help make this political ambition a legislative reality.
In the meantime, we ask you to accept, Ladies and Gentlemen, the assurance of our respectful greetings.
Jonathan Jéremiasz, President of Mouvess
#Open #letter #Mouvess #parliamentarians #SSE