In this autumn devoted to the examination of the budgetary texts, the National Assembly continues to live to the rhythm of 49.3 and motions of censure. For the sixth time in just over a month, the few deputies present in the Hemicycle, Monday, November 28, were called upon to debate a motion aimed at overthrowing the government. This had been filed by La France insoumise (LFI) after the new 49.3 activated Friday evening by the Prime Minister, Elisabeth Borne, on the “expenditure” section of the Social Security financing bill (PLFSS), without No amendment was examined in new reading by the elected officials.
For the sixth time, the “rebellious”, supported by some of their environmentalist and communist allies, failed to obtain an absolute majority by collecting only 93 votes – far from the 289 votes necessary. If the outcome of these elections is not in doubt, causing some tension in the New People’s Ecological and Social Union (Nupes) on the need to systematically table motions of censure trivializing their effects, it is for LFI to continue to denounce the repeated use of 49.3 by the executive. From the rostrum of the National Assembly, the member for Loire-Atlantique Ségolène Amiot (LFI) thus accused the government of Elisabeth Borne of “killing democracy slowly ». “We all know how you operate, as a board of directors. But the French Republic is not a company, and it will never again be an absolute regime.she lambasted for the Prime Minister.
While the Socialist Party (PS) once again did not vote for this motion of censure, justifying “tactical differences” with thes “rebellious”, the deputy of Calvados Arthur Delaporte also deplored in his speech the “long litany of 49.3 », reminding the government of its promise to build “a new method” consultation with the oppositions after the loss of the absolute majority in June. “We want you to remember that democratic vitality is a major bulwark against populism. The indiscriminate use of 49.3 sends the opposite signal”, supported the elected socialist. In response to these attacks, Elisabeth Borne estimated from the podium that it was not “not serious to speak of brutality, for the use of a constitutional tool by which a government engages its responsibility in front of numerically more numerous oppositions”.
You have 45.02% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.