Opponents of pension reform in France lost miserably to Macron

French President Macron pushed through the pension reform he cherished, raising the minimum retirement age from 62 to 64 years. Faced with opposition from opposition legislators, the government used a special procedure to pass the law bypassing parliament. Dissatisfied French people are indignant, trade unions threaten new protest actions, and deputies want to dismiss the cabinet of ministers. But, apparently, the government has achieved what it wants.

Although the controversial pension reform bill had been passed by the French Senate earlier, the French government’s attempt to “kindly” push through the lower house of parliament (the National Assembly) to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64 years was a priori seen as a rather dubious enterprise, since Macron’s centrist supporters do not have absolute parliamentary majority, and left and right-wing parties (plus some conservatives) oppose innovations.

And so it happened – the discussion of the bill turned into chaos. The leftist deputies sang the Marseillaise at the top of their voices to interfere with the speech of Prime Minister Elisabeth Bourne. Other parliamentarians shouted “Resign! Resign!”

In a word, due to such an obstruction, the meeting had to be interrupted before the head of the Cabinet again tried to be heard and convey to the parliament the idea that the bill would be passed anyway, since the government cannot “risk the future of our pensions.”

The fact is that it was assumed in advance that Macron and the company would have a “plan B” in case the legislators disagree. At the last minute, the French president decided not to take any chances and avoid a vote in parliament. A few minutes before the deputies of the lower house were to vote, the head of state suddenly decided to use special powers. The fact is that Article 49.3 of the constitution of the Fifth Republic gives the government the right to bypass Parliament.

In general, Article 49 of the Basic Law of France establishes the political responsibility of the government (executive power) to Parliament. And subsection 3 of that article allows the government to force the bill to pass without a vote unless parliament votes for a vote of no confidence, but such a move has little chance of being passed as it could also lead to the dissolution of parliament and new elections. Historically, this situation arose at a time when Parliament was often divided into numerous undisciplined factions that interfered with normal legislative work.

In fact, Article 49.3 allows the government to put an end to any obstruction by the opposition. The section 49.3 procedure has been used by French prime ministers since 1958 about 90 times. So this is not to say that the current case is anything out of the ordinary. But many politicians (usually in opposition) view the controversial constitutional article as being against democracy and democratic debate. True, it happened that the same politicians who criticized 49.3, when they were in power, themselves applied this article with pleasure.

Be that as it may, returning to the current situation, President Macron told cabinet ministers that the financial risks would be too great if the pension law he was promoting were rejected by deputies.

Such a feint angered the disgruntled French. Thousands of people took to the spontaneous protest at the Place de la Concorde in central Paris. Philippe Martinez, head of the CGT trade union, said that the forced adoption of the law “demonstrates disrespect for the people.” The police used tear gas and water cannons to disperse the raging protesters, and 120 people were detained in the capital alone.

French trade unions have called for another day of strikes and protests against the reform next Thursday, 23 March. However, against the backdrop of ignoring the opinion of parliamentarians by the government, the protest plans may seem to fit into the formula “they don’t wave their fists after a fight.” And since even at the stage of discussing the reform, thousands of demonstrations across the country did not convince the authors of the innovations, it is extremely doubtful that Macron will play back now.

However, there is some possibility that the use by the executive branch of the special powers provided for in Article 49.3 of the French constitution may backfire on the government. Left-wing politicians, who accused the ministers of being undemocratic and cruel, called the government’s actions a major defeat and a sign of weakness. “This is a complete failure of the government,” said far-right leader Marine Le Pen, adding that the prime minister should resign: “After the slap that the prime minister just gave the French people by imposing a reform that they do not want, I think that Elizabeth Bourne must go.”

The opposition—both Lepin’s National Rally and the far-left Invincible France—set their sights on calling for a vote of no confidence in the government in the near future. True, it is doubtful that it will be possible to topple the cabinet right now, since polarized opposition parties will have to unite their efforts to do this, while the right-wing Republicans have made it clear that they will not support such a vote.

So, as expected, the bill pushed by the government should be submitted to the constitutional court and, most likely, will acquire the force of law.

Recall that in accordance with Macron’s pension reform, the minimum general retirement age will increase by two years (to 64 years – despite the fact that most European countries have raised the retirement age to 65 years), some public sector workers will lose privileges and there will be an accelerated increase in the number of years length of service required to receive a full pension.

According to polls, two-thirds of the French are opposed to pension changes. And unions say the reform will hit low-income, manual laborers who tend to start their careers early.

The government insists that raising the retirement age, eliminating benefits for some public sector workers and tightening the criteria for full pensions are necessary to prevent a large deficit from accumulating. France, with one of the lowest retirement ages in the industrialized world, spends more on pensions than most other countries, accounting for almost 14% of economic output, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. At the same time, Macron’s supporters say that the reform is necessary in order to preserve the pension system for a long time into the future. Indeed, according to the French Pensions Advisory Board, the projected annual deficit will be 10 billion euros between 2022 and 2032.

Read the material “1400 euros in hand: what pensions are the French rebelling against”