Elisabeth Borne, the prime minister, used the article 49 paragraph 3 of the constitution to bypass the parliament and raise the retirement age from 62 to 64 years without a vote from the parliament.
First of all, this law about raising the retirement age is really infamous. About three quarters of the French people don’t want this reform and around 93% of working people don’t want it.
Secondly, the government really didn’t respect the parliament from the start. They used the article 47.1, the article 44.3 and now the article 49-3. All these articles that are from the constitution made the debate quicker and even stopped the debate at the end when the government just decided to pass this reform without a vote from the parliament because they weren’t sure if their reform would pass if they didn’t do that. Being able to stop the debate and to not respect the parliament is absurd for the executive in a democracy.
Thirdly, this reform isn’t “necessary” because as the retirement fund will maybe have a deficit in the next years, the others funds such as the unemployment one and the health one have a surplus. And even if we need money there are a lot of ways to get it even if we don’t raise the retirement age.
Finally the government lied a lot of times such as when they said the minimum for the retirement would be 1200 € or when they said this was the only option (when we’re in a democracy…) or when they said and when they still say that this reform is necessary or even when Macron said he wanted the reform “to complete its democratic journey” when he clearly doesn’t respect the democracy in our country.
In my opinion, the 49.3 law is completely undemocratic because there is no vote of the deputies on the reform in this case the reform of the pensions. Moreover the great majority of the French is against, as a consequence of the use of the 49.3 law the strikes and demonstrations will continue.
First of all, the Prime Minister should have had the text voted on because the French were unhappy with Article 49 paragraph 3. However, if she had not used this article, the text of the reform would not have been written into the constitution. In my opinion, Emmanuel Macron should have made a referendum to the French people because the text of the pensions is an important text. Moreover, Emmanuel Macron was not elected on his political program but to block the far right, which means that many French people do not agree with Emmanuel Macron.
CORRECTION BLOG:First of all, the Prime Minister should have had the text voted on because the French were unhappy with Article 49 paragraph 3. However, if she had not used this article, the text of the reform would not have been written into the constitution. In my opinion, Emmanuel Macron should have made a referendum to allow French people because the text of the pensions is an important text. Moreover, Emmanuel Macron was not elected on his political program but to block the far right, which means that many French people do not agree with Emmanuel Macron.
some think that this is no longer just a fight for the workers, it's a fight for democracy or even that it's an insult to the French people but for me if the opinion of our representatives shows us that this must be approved then it's the best solution and we have to pinch ourselves
on the one hand I think that 49.3 can have an impact on our democracy because indeed it is used to force the passage of a law without having our representatives of the national assembly and the senate vote but on the other hand I think that it is important to trust the government if they think that postponing the retirement age is fundamental then it must be done
I think 49.3 is an attack on democracy although it is enshrined in the constitution, because the voice of the people is not listened to. In my view, this is a right of veto which should be prohibited. However, I do not think that the incessant demonstrations since the approval of the pension reform is necessary, because in my opinion, this reform will not change. Indeed, I think that the Heads of State will see that as a defeat is a step back that they do not want to perform. Tatiana
First of all, this law about raising the retirement age is really infamous. About three quarters of the French people don’t want this reform and around 93% of working people don’t want it.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, the government really didn’t respect the parliament from the start. They used the article 47.1, the article 44.3 and now the article 49-3. All these articles that are from the constitution made the debate quicker and even stopped the debate at the end when the government just decided to pass this reform without a vote from the parliament because they weren’t sure if their reform would pass if they didn’t do that. Being able to stop the debate and to not respect the parliament is absurd for the executive in a democracy.
Thirdly, this reform isn’t “necessary” because as the retirement fund will maybe have a deficit in the next years, the others funds such as the unemployment one and the health one have a surplus. And even if we need money there are a lot of ways to get it even if we don’t raise the retirement age.
Finally the government lied a lot of times such as when they said the minimum for the retirement would be 1200 € or when they said this was the only option (when we’re in a democracy…) or when they said and when they still say that this reform is necessary or even when Macron said he wanted the reform “to complete its democratic journey” when he clearly doesn’t respect the democracy in our country.
In my opinion, the 49.3 law is completely undemocratic because there is no vote of the deputies on the reform in this case the reform of the pensions. Moreover the great majority of the French is against, as a consequence of the use of the 49.3 law the strikes and demonstrations will continue.
ReplyDelete*the deputies didn't vote
Delete*French people are against, consequently
First of all, the Prime Minister should have had the text voted on because the French were unhappy with Article 49 paragraph 3.
ReplyDeleteHowever, if she had not used this article, the text of the reform would not have been written into the constitution.
In my opinion, Emmanuel Macron should have made a referendum to the French people because the text of the pensions is an important text. Moreover, Emmanuel Macron was not elected on his political program but to block the far right, which means that many French people do not agree with Emmanuel Macron.
CORRECTION BLOG:First of all, the Prime Minister should have had the text voted on because the French were unhappy with Article 49 paragraph 3.
DeleteHowever, if she had not used this article, the text of the reform would not have been written into the constitution.
In my opinion, Emmanuel Macron should have made a referendum to allow French people because the text of the pensions is an important text. Moreover, Emmanuel Macron was not elected on his political program but to block the far right, which means that many French people do not agree with Emmanuel Macron.
ReplyDeletesome think that this is no longer just a fight for the workers, it's a fight for democracy or even that it's an insult to the French people but for me if the opinion of our representatives shows us that this must be approved then it's the best solution and we have to pinch ourselves
on the one hand I think that 49.3 can have an impact on our democracy because indeed it is used to force the passage of a law without having our representatives of the national assembly and the senate vote but on the other hand I think that it is important to trust the government if they think that postponing the retirement age is fundamental then it must be done
ReplyDeleteI think 49.3 is an attack on democracy although it is enshrined in the constitution, because the voice of the people is not listened to. In my view, this is a right of veto which should be prohibited. However, I do not think that the incessant demonstrations since the approval of the pension reform is necessary, because in my opinion, this reform will not change. Indeed, I think that the Heads of State will see that as a defeat is a step back that they do not want to perform.
ReplyDeleteTatiana