Questioned on BFMTV, the former President of the Republic and current PS deputy at Corrèze hopes that the new government of François Bayrou will convene “a social conference, with the social partners, to re-discuss a certain number of parameters of this reform” of pensions.
“Then it will be in 2027 that the issue of pensions will arise again.The only method I know at this stage is not to ask for repeal (…) There must be - a suspension perhaps – but a social conference that allows us to improve the fate of the French who will be preparing to retire in a few months ”, he explained.
If we consider the repeal as the reason that justifies the censorship, “in effect the censorship is mechanical, as the government does not want to take this path”, explained François Hollande.
The first secretary of the PS Olivier Faure had already expressed himself in favor of “a freeze” of the pension reform, and no longer an immediate repeal, to first organize “a financing conference” that would allow a future repeal.
More tax justice
Hollande cited among the possible negotiations with the government also its refusal to eliminate 4,000 places in public education, the issue of medical reimbursements, “the evolution of voting methods”, alluding to proportional portrayal, and the evolution of the budget towards greater “fiscal justice”.
It also considers it “unacceptable” to include in a new law on immigration the measures censured by the Constitutional Council in the previous one.
Asked about continuing the mandate, the far-right Interior Minister, Bruno Retailleau, said he did not want to judge ”people” but “actions”.
He also distanced himself from the request of the PS, the PCF and environmentalists that the government give up the 49.3 in exchange for non-censorship.
“It’s better to avoid 49.3, let’s let the discussion get to the end. But we have to treat this topic with caution, as if we said not to use 49.3 it would mean that the socialists would have to approve the budget or abstain from the budget. And if they don’t agree, what do they do? “, he asked.
The former president also hoped that François Bayrou would enjoy a form of “freedom” and “independence” towards Emmanuel Macron, taking into account the “conditions in which he was appointed”, “since the president (y) was undoubtedly forced.”
What are the potential consequences of delaying pension reform discussions until 2027 in france?
Interview with françois Hollande: Insights on Pension Reform adn Political Dynamics in France
Q: Thank you for joining us today, Mr.Hollande. LetS start with your recent comments on pension reform.You suggested a social conference to re-discuss certain parameters of this policy. Could you elaborate on why you believe this is necessary?
A: Thank you for having me. The pension reform has sparked notable debate and concern among the French populace. A social conference, including all social partners, is essential for addressing the complexities surrounding this reform. It offers a space to engage in constructive dialog that can lead to better solutions for those preparing to retire in the coming months. Instead of pushing for an outright repeal,we shoudl consider a temporary suspension of the reform to facilitate this discussion and improve the fate of future retirees.
Q: You mentioned that the issue of pensions will arise again in 2027. what are the implications of putting this discussion on hold until then?
A: By postponing a full discussion until 2027, we run the risk of creating a larger divide between the government and citizens regarding pension security. Delaying the conversation can lead to misunderstandings and discontent among the working population. Thus, it is indeed crucial to maintain a dialogue now, allowing for adjustments and improvements to the current legislative framework before it becomes a contentious issue once again.
Q: The current political climate seems complex,especially with varying opinions within the political sphere. Can you discuss the stance of Olivier Faure regarding a freeze on the pension reform?
A: Olivier Faure’s proposal for a freeze,rather than a full repeal,showcases a more strategic approach. This paves the way for organizing a financing conference that can underpin future negotiations. It’s about balancing immediate needs with long-term fiscal duty. A freeze provides the government and the oppositional parties a chance to collaborate thoughtfully rather than fostering animosity through antagonistic measures.
Q: You also touched on broader issues of tax justice and public service cuts. How do these topics intertwine with the pension discussion?
A: The issues of tax justice and public service cuts are inseparable from pension reforms. A government that prioritizes wider fiscal responsibility can ensure better resources are allocated to essential services, including public education and healthcare, both of which directly impact retirees. It’s unacceptable to make cuts in public education while discussing pensions, as these decisions affect the social fabric and future generations. A complete approach to fiscal policy will provide clarity and assurance to all citizens, including future retirees.
Q: On immigration, you’ve expressed concerns regarding measures censured by the Constitutional Council.What are the implications of this on current immigration debates?
A: It is essential for any new law on immigration to respect previous legal judgments and not to try to circumvent them. Including censured measures undermines the legal framework and erodes trust in governmental processes.As we discuss immigration, we must operate under established legal principles while striving for solutions that are fair, just, and respect human rights.
Q: what is your perspective on the political landscape under françois Bayrou’s leadership? Do you believe he will maintain independence from President Macron?
A: I hope that François Bayrou is able to enjoy a degree of freedom and independence as he navigates his role. The conditions of his appointment suggest that he might potentially be balancing acts imposed by higher powers. However, by doing so, he could champion more nuanced discussions that take into account the public’s needs without succumbing entirely to the presidential agenda. This independence is crucial for fostering a true dialogue in the political sphere.
Q: Thank you for your insightful perspectives today, Mr. Hollande. your comments on pension reform and broader political issues are invaluable as we navigate these critical times in France.
A: Thank you for the prospect to share my thoughts. Engaging in these discussions is vital for moving forward effectively as a nation.