Why Did Macron Ignite Confrontation with Millions of French People?

In a challenge to the already angry French street, President Emmanuel Macron’s government has approved the “pension reform” bill without submitting it to a vote in the National Assembly (the first chamber of parliament), which has led to further anger throughout the country.

Since January 19th, 2023, millions of French people have been demonstrating in rejection of this alleged reform which stipulates the main Article of raising the legal retirement age from 62 to 64 years old.

On March 16, 2023, Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne announced the use of constitutional Article 49. 3 to pass the bill, which allows for the adoption of a text without a vote in the National Assembly, unless a proposal to withhold confidence is made to overthrow the government.

To bring down the government, an absolute majority in the National Assembly must vote in favor of a proposal to withdraw confidence, which is 287 votes out of 577. This requires left and far-right parties to unite, which is an unlikely scenario.

 

Political Arbitrariness

Borne justified passing the law in this arbitrary manner by stating that “uncertainty hangs over a small number of votes, and we cannot risk 175 hours of parliamentary debate collapsing.”

During the National Assembly session on March 16, she added: “we cannot take the risk of seeing a rejected compromise because this reform is necessary.”

The controversial pension reform law provides for a gradual increase in the legal retirement age from 62 to 64 years, by three months per year, starting from September 2023 until 2030.

The bill also includes an increase in the required duration of contributions to the social security system from 42 to 43 years, so that retirees can receive their full pension without any deductions.

The government relies on this amendment to ensure the financing of the social security system, which is one of the pillars of the French social model. However, the protesters see it as a violation of their acquired workers’ rights to enjoy longer retirement benefits.

In his comment on Macron’s insistence to pass this law, Omar el-Mourabet, former deputy mayor of the French municipality of Athis-Mons, explained that the pension reform project was proposed during the first presidential term of President Macron.

El-Mourabet added to Al-Estiklal that all previous French presidents tried to reform the pension system, where some minor reforms were carried out, such as raising the retirement age from 60 to 62 years.

He continued that Macron had previously proposed in his election program to raise the retirement age to 65 years because the current system does not fulfill promises and suffers from a severe deficit that will make it unable to pay pensions to retirees by the year 2027.

Through the pension system reform (increasing the legal retirement age and extending contributions to obtain a full pension), Macron is seeking to achieve balance in the accounts of the government pension system.

Officials in Macron’s government believe that without taking radical reform in this law, the deficit in the pension system will reach more than $13 billion annually by 2027.

El-Mourabet pointed out that the current system is based on those who are currently working paying pensions to retirees, indicating that the number of retirees has increased significantly compared to the number of workers, leading to a worsening of the pension system deficit, and thus Macron was forced to carry out this reform.

El-Mourabet believes that Macron has nothing to lose as long as he is in his second presidential term, “but history will testify that he carried out structural reforms in France, including reforming the pension system.”

 

‘Forceful Passage’

Observers attributed Macron’s decision to pass the pension reform without a parliamentary vote to his concerns about being unable to secure a majority in the National Assembly, after it had already been approved by the Senate (the second chamber of parliament).

Despite announcing on March 15, 2023, that he “wants to go to a vote” in the National Assembly on the pension reform, Macron chose to pass it without a vote.

The French Senate, which has a right-wing majority, had approved the bill with 193 votes in favor and 114 votes against.

Macron justified his decision to resort to Article 49.3 of the French Constitution to pass the law due to the major financial and economic risks facing France.

However, the truth is that the ruling party and its allies lack a comfortable majority in the National Assembly, which has raised concerns in the government about its ability to obtain the necessary number of votes to pass the law.

According to local media reports, Macron was faced with two options: either to go to a vote with an uncertain result, or to pass the government’s bill without a vote, relying on a constitutional provision to make it legal.

He ultimately chose the “easy solution by using the force of authority” to pass the law.

Since its introduction in 1958, Article 49.3 of the French Constitution has been used 91 times, three of which were under Macron’s rule.

According to his critics, Macron has become politically isolated due to his inability to muster a comfortable majority to pass the law naturally.

All the allies he spoke to did not agree or withdrew from the alliance out of fear of union threats and the large crowds opposed to the pension reform project.

 

Between the Constitution and the Street

As soon as the French Prime Minister announced the decision to pass the law without a vote, spontaneous crowds came out in protest against this decision. More than 300 people, including 258 in Paris alone, were arrested, according to Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin.

Clashes also broke out between riot police and protesters angry over the French government’s use of a constitutional provision to impose reforms related to raising the retirement age from 62 to 64 without a parliamentary vote.

In response to Macron’s approach of passing the retirement reform law without a parliamentary vote, unions have threatened to resort to “street power” day and night to pressure the president to withdraw the law.

The union federation plans “local gatherings,” in addition to a ninth day of strikes and demonstrations on March 23, 2023, while union officials have warned of excesses.

French anger is also explained by the accumulation of piles of trash filling Paris streets amid garbage collectors’ strikes.

 

No More Confidence

In addition to angry street protests and unions, many French politicians and lawmakers have expressed their disapproval of the government’s use of Article 49.

There is almost a consensus among the opposition that resorting to Article 49 to pass the law is a setback for Macron, who has staked his political capital on this reform, making it one of the most prominent projects of his second presidential term.

“Emmanuel Macron’s government narrowly survived a no-confidence vote in the French parliament Monday, after it pushed through a deeply unpopular pensions overhaul without a vote last week,” according to Politico.

“In a high-stakes vote in France’s lower house of parliament, 278 MPs, mostly from the left and the far right, voted in favor of a cross-party motion of no confidence, falling just short of the 287 votes needed to topple the government. A second motion, backed only by the far-right National Rally, did not garner enough votes.”

Politico reported on March 20, 2023, that “the outcome of the first vote was much tighter than anticipated and increased the pressure on Macron to withdraw his reform. It may also give a boost to the protest movement led by trade unions against the measures. The French president will also be under pressure to respond either by addressing the country or reshuffling his government.”

El-Mourabet said that Macron’s resort to passing the law without a vote was due to his lack of a comfortable majority that would allow him to pass structural reforms.

It should be noted that “Macron’s current government lacks a comfortable majority, with only 250 seats in parliament, compared to 327 seats for the opposition.”

He added that the lack of a comfortable majority would lead to the fall of the government, and thus this constitutional article that allows the government to pass laws without voting was used.

Regarding the repercussions of this decision on the political and social life in France, el-Mourabet said: “70% of the French people have expressed their rejection of this project and said that if it were passed through a vote in parliament, at least it would have credibility because it was passed democratically.”

He added that “even passing the law through Article 49.3, although democratically passed, was done with violence and force.”

He emphasized that passing this project in this way will lead to an increase in the level of social unrest and dissatisfaction with the government’s actions.