INFO THE POINT. The PS deputy Jérôme Guedj obtained the opinion delivered by the administrative body on the text reforming pensions. He could challenge the bill.
By Michel Revol
Published on
Subscriber-only audio playback
VS’is a sentence pronounced in the National Assembly which did not make much noise but which could have some unfortunate consequences for the government. Friday, February 17, on the occasion of a point of order, the socialist deputy Jérôme Guedj gets up from his bench and speaks.
He recalls that, the day before, in his capacity as vice-president of the mission of evaluation and control of social security (MECSS), he pushed the door of the direction of Social Security. The member for Essonne wanted to understand which pensions would be affected by the increase in pensions.
Confidential document
At the microphone, he also slips, in conclusion, that after this “descent” he took a trip to Matignon. Jérôme Guedj had an appointment, at the end of the day, with the secretary general of the government, Claire Landais. She had no choice: by virtue of his power of control, the vice-president of the MECSS wants to obtain a confidential document, which could weaken the pension reform.
The document in question is the opinion of the Council of State concerning the social security financing bill, otherwise summarized in PLFSS. It is through this legislative vehicle that the government intends to reform the general system – and some special systems – of pensions.
READ ALSOMacron and the pension reform: the secret story of a renunciationThe government is not required to make public the opinions of the highest administrative body when they concern budgetary matters. It chose not to do so in the case of the PLFSS. A desire which, according to Jérôme Guedj, feeds “all speculation on the legal solidity of several articles of the PLFSS”. In other words, the government’s choice to go through the social security bill would be legally questionable.
Future recourse
Laurent Fabius, the President of the Constitutional Council, did he not express, in private, doubts about the constitutionality of several articles, which would not have their place in a financing law but rather in an ordinary law? The opinion of the Council of State seems to confirm the fears of Laurent Fabius.
READ ALSOThese very special diets: the Comédie-FrançaiseThe administrative authority, which had suggested to the government to withdraw articles whose presence in the PLFSS did not seem justified, would point to possible legal weaknesses. The reform would not have any financial impact in 2023, which is the scope of the PLFSS.
The member for Essonne intends to use the arguments of the Council of State to counter the pension reform project when the text returns to the National Assembly, after the discussion in the Senate. Jérôme Guedj also wants to rely on this opinion during a future appeal to the Constitutional Council.