Arthur de Laborde, edited by Gauthier Delomez
modified to
10:05 p.m., January 20, 2023
No question of touching the retirement age at 64, the flagship measure of the pension reform the day after a major demonstration against the government’s project. Prime Minister Élisabeth Borne does not intend to make any concessions on two points either, which nevertheless arouse tension within the majority itself. First, the question of 1,200 euros for the minimum pension. Some walkers claim net but it will be gross. Elisabeth Borne’s entourage explains that in reality, this will not change much for those concerned since the CSG is the only compulsory deduction to which they will be subject, which represents barely 1 or 2% of the pension.
“All those who are against the reform can explain to their parents who receive the minimum pension that the increase in pensions of 100 euros is no!”, He insists.
44 years of contributions for long careers
Matignon does not envisage any evolution on long careers either. Those around Elisabeth Borne consider the criticisms coming in particular from her Republican allies against the famous 44 years of contributions for those who started working very young to be unjustified. They will have to contribute one year more than the 43 annuities announced, but they will be able to leave four years before the legal age, specifies a close friend of the Prime Minister. “We have never developed such a generous long career system,” he adds.
Negotiations are still possible during the parliamentary debate on a few points, in particular family rights, survivors’ pensions and the employment of seniors. On the other hand, “nothing can modify the budgetary balance of the text”, which promises that “the text will live in the Assembly”. He also recalls that many proposals from the social partners have been taken up, such as the transition from 65 to 64 or the minimum pension for future retirees but also current ones.
The lethal weapon of the 47-1 rather than the 49-3
Regarding the method, “Élisabeth Borne is looking for all the ways not to resort to 49-3 but in the end, whatever happens, the text will have to be adopted”, confides a relative, who specifies that to limit the time of parliamentary debate, recourse to article 47-1 is a real option. Criticized for its undemocratic nature, this procedure has never been used since the creation of the Constitution. “If the Parliament has not decided within 50 days, the provisions of the project can be implemented by ordinance”, specifies the supreme norm.
Unlike 49-3, the use of article 47-1 cannot be challenged by a motion of censure. “The debate is taking place in conditions that we have never had in the Assembly. It forces us to go to the end of all the possibilities of the Constitution”, explains Elisabeth Borne’s entourage.
To reverse the trend in public opinion, the head of government is banking on education. “There is still a long way to go. We are not going to start feverishly changing things now. “But we have to explain to the French that if we are not able to complete this project, we will not be able to save our pay-as-you-go system,” insists the Prime Minister’s entourage.