The Liot bill not debated? “We wonder what the Parliament is for”, launches Bertrand Pancher


Romain Rouillard / Photo credit: GAUTHIER BEDRIGNANS / HANS LUCAS / HANS LUCAS VIA AFP

It is through a proposal emptied of its substance that the pension reform will reappear at the Palais Bourbon next Thursday. Last week, the National Assembly’s Social Affairs Committee rejected the main article of the bill from the Libertés, Indépendants, Outre-mer et Territoires (Liot) group, which provided for the repeal of the postponement of the legal retirement age at 64. A show of hands that buried the hopes of the parliamentary group to cancel the most divisive measure of this pension reform. Yaël Braun-Pivet, President of the National Assembly, even indicated last Thursday, on Europe 1, that the text had a “low chance” of being placed on the agenda on June 8. In other words, it could not be debated in the hemicycle.

Such a scenario would arouse some wrath in the ranks of the Liot group. In particular with the deputy of the Meuse, Bertrand Pancher, questioned this Saturday on Europe 1. “It is no longer quite the subject of pensions. It is clear that we are arriving in a serious institutional crisis if the president of the national does not defend Parliament by ensuring that our bill can be debated”, he denounced at the microphone of Pierre de Vilno.

“It would be an extremely serious precedent”

And to continue by summoning a historical argument. “I am going to remind your listeners that, since the start of the Fifth Republic, all parliamentary bills have been debated and it would be an extremely serious precedent not to do so”. To justify his position, Yaël Braun-Pivet argued article 40 of the Constitution which prohibits parliamentarians from creating or increasing a public office. In this case, the Liot group’s bill would “constitute a burden” for public finances, according to the patron of the Hemicycle.

A “completely crazy” argument, assures Bertrand Pancher. “That would mean that, when you are a deputy, you can no longer present a bill because there are financial implications. It has never been seen,” he insists. The MP then lists what he considers to be “obstruction measures” used by the government during parliamentary debates on pension reform. “They said it was a finance law – when it was questionable – and therefore limited in time. Then a vote blocked in the Senate, after a 49.3… All that was legal but frankly not exemplary in terms of democracy (…) one wonders what the purpose of Parliament is”, he lambasted.

Next week will therefore see the pension reform come back to the fore since 48 hours before the arrival of this bill in Parliament, a 14th day of mobilization will take place. According to information from Europe 1, between 400,000 and 600,000 demonstrators are expected everywhere in France.



Source link -74