Jean-Christophe Cambadélis: “The Socialist Party is in great pain”



Ssupport from Hélène Geoffroy, the historical opponent of Olivier Faure, the former first secretary of the PS Jean-Christophe Cambadélis was at the forefront of the double vote organized, on January 12 and 19, to designate the new boss of the party. After a second vote count, Olivier Faure, outgoing first secretary, was confirmed as the winner of the members’ vote. For Point, Jean-Christophe Cambadélis evokes the consequences of the vote within a party “cut in two”, but also of Nupes, which he fights.

Le Dot: After a chaotic congress, the Socialist Party finds itself with two declared winners for a post. How to explain it?

Jean-Christophe Cambadélis: The PS is in great pain. And the militants are just as much. The trauma of the rout in 2017 has not been overcome. Two strategic orientations face each other. Should we continue in the Nupes or rebuild to reformulate the union? But there is no majority to overcome this new crisis, which undermines the legitimacy of the PS. The outgoing leadership was slow to create the conditions for a renaissance. She thought to save time by finding temporary substitutes like Glucksmann, Jadot, Taubira and now, Mélenchon. But the latter is not in his best shape. The Nupes is contested everywhere. The legislative elections are far away. So, a small but real majority, as shown by the results of the vote on the motions, wanted something else, otherwise. In a PS reduced to less than 20,000 voters, Olivier Faure admitted not having an absolute majority on orientation motions, while the Nicolas Mayer-Rossignol and Hélène Geoffroy alliance represented more than 50%. This state of affairs was reflected in the vote of the first secretary. The refusal to hold a commission to validate and announce the results did the rest. It is secession.

READ ALSOCoignard – PS: fight of titans on the “Titanic”

What could be the way out?

We must first look up, look at the world and the challenges facing France, and think first of the French. Then return to the question that orders everything: what responses to joint crises? How to rebuild a responsible left that offers solutions to the French? How to build a new political cycle, a new doctrine, new responses, a new strategy, a new organization? In short, all the questions that the Socialists asked themselves, after going through 68 to create the new Socialist Party in 1971 with Mitterrand. This is what we are thinking about and working on with my friends from the Laboratory of Social Democracy (The LAB). We want to bring together, coordinate, federate social democrats from all sides to, with all or part of the PS, prepare the foundations of a new Épinay.

I fear the worst at the Congress of Marseilles.

But the PS is in a sorry state…

It seems to me that no one is ready to accept a coup de force. So the question is simple: do the two blocs still want to make a “common party”? If so, there are always solutions, even if this episode has dramatically damaged the PS. If not, well, the two camps will separate. We are not there, but we are getting closer. I fear the worst at the Congress of Marseilles. All this will have consequences on the left, because everyone has understood that the alliance with Mélenchon was ultimately aimed at preparing a single Nupes presidential candidate.

READ ALSOAt PS, snakes replace elephants

But you who supported Hélène Geoffroy, you are not disappointed by her defeat?

Without Hélène Geoffroy, Nicolas Mayer-Rossignol could not hope to win. And without Nicolas Mayer-Rossignol, Hélène Geoffroy could not think of beating the outgoing management. Through her courage and her quiet determination, Hélène Geoffroy paved the way for the management to be put on waivers. She is at the head of a real coherent social-democratic current which we will talk about later. It is now unavoidable. It is not a blocking minority, but a minority for unblocking the crisis of the Socialist Party. She avoided the flight of militants hostile to Nupes elsewhere, even if some of her supporters considered that the task was impossible. Nicolas Mayer-Rossignol, through his talent, embodied an alternative to the “faurist” majority, supported by Michaël Delafosse, Carole Delga, Anne Hidalgo and Patrick Kanner. Finally, Olivier Faure lost the majority, mainly because of what has become of Nupes.

You were one of the first to speak out against Nupes. The union is therefore not essential for you, even with a weakened PS?

All my life, I have campaigned for the union on the left. I am for the union, but not for this union. Simply because she is not winning. It is dated and does not meet the needs of today’s French people, in today’s France. It’s essential. Then, it mutilates the autonomy of the formations that compose it, while marginalizing them. It is reduced to a parliamentary agreement where La France insoumise sets the tone and the rhythm, in a frontal opposition as thunderous as it is unbridled. We saw it in the jumble on the vote of the motion of censure, mixing the voices of the left and that of the RN. Fortunately, the PS then the PCF and the ecologists did not continue in this way.

READ ALSOMayer-Rossignol: “Olivier Faure is unable to guarantee party unity”

But what should Olivier Faure have done?

First, to convince themselves that the left-wing electorate was not suddenly “melenchonized”. Part of the electoral left again went to Macron, faced with the rise of the RN; another party abstained; a majority party made the choice of the useful vote. There was no “LFIist” crystallization in the left electorate, beyond what it represents. Then, to share this state of mind with the PCF who only asked for that, and with the ecologists who were not far from it. But we did the reverse. We said: we must save the furniture and we started with a secret meeting with Mélenchon. We didn’t apply the challenge from the weak to the strong. Without the Socialist Party, Mélenchon’s coup (“elect me Prime Minister”) fell through and, consequently, the useful vote in favor of LFI. Mélenchon knew it. This is also the reason why he had launched this maneuver. He would have yielded, the union would have been more politically centered and balanced in terms of deputies. There, we dropped everything. But hey, we don’t cry over spilled milk. It’s past history. But now, we can’t maintain the Nupes as it is. Everyone says it, the PCF, the ecologists, etc. And LFI cannot oppose it. But this hypothetical renegotiation cannot be done until the PS has made its reformist transformation and launched a new course on the left.

But isn’t there a demand for radicalism in French society, and particularly on the left?

Are you so sure? I believe there is a demand for solutions and results. We confuse the militant left which, in fact, has become radicalized since 2016 and the electoral left which is exasperated by the absence of a practicable solution.

Mélenchon’s friends quickly put it on the shelf for the future.

Doesn’t the movement against the pension reform come at the right time to help the PS win again?

The goal of the movement is to obtain the withdrawal of this unfair age measure, without too much damage and blockages for the country and the French. That being the case, it is necessary to know how to blend into the union while distinguishing oneself from it. There is no risk of winning again, defending, as Olivier Faure now says, retirement at 60 from LFI. Whereas he said recently that it would cost so much that it would absorb all the social expenses. The CFDT is in the trade union by not being for retirement at 60 years. We are not asked to be zealous in following others to a measure in which we do not believe.

LFI is weakened by the Quatennens affair. Can’t the PS take advantage of it?

A slap to his wife is not acceptable. Once judged, Quatennens should have resigned, even if it means standing again. The line of trivialization of the slap could not and will not pass. And time is irrelevant. In April, when he returns to the group, Adrien Quatennens will be the expiatory victim of violence against women. And the crisis, somewhat contained by the fight against pension reform, will start again. Mélenchon believed that he had bent the game to the left and imposed the unchallenged domination of left populism over the latter. At the same time, he thought that by being above, he would be ahead. He did not stand for re-election. Politics abhors a vacuum. And his friends were quick to put it on the shelf for the sequel. He takes things in hand by “bombarding” the management. This is perhaps not the time to be a follower hoping to be recognized or dubbed by LFI. We must deal with the new PS and firmly ask for the reformulation of the union in the aftermath of the movement on pensions.

READ ALSOOlivier Faure: “I didn’t betray anything at all”




Source link -82