The only visible difference will be the absence of fireworks. Paris held them last night instead, leaving July 14 for commemorations of the 10th anniversary of the Nice terrorist attack.
Still, few things in France are business as usual these days. And that is not just because there will be a presidential election in 2027. Having served two terms, Emmanuel Macron cannot stand again.
What makes this year different is that the future of the Fifth Republic itself is at stake. After the 2027 election, France may be quite a different country, with a very different president.
That president may well be Marine Le Pen. Last Tuesday, a Paris appeals court upheld her conviction for channelling millions of euros of European Parliament money to her party’s staff. Part of her sentence is a year to be served under electronic monitoring with an ankle tag.
The same evening, she declared her candidacy anyway. Days before, she had said a candidate could not possibly ask a magistrate for permission every time she wanted to visit a market. Well, that was then.
She does not yet wear the tag, because her appeal to France’s highest court suspends enforcement of the sentence. The judges want to rule before the election, so Le Pen will start her campaign without knowing whether her sentence will commence before she finishes it.
The French press has talked about little else since the verdict. Yet the tag is the least important thing happening in France.
The conviction itself was fair enough. Le Pen’s party took money meant for parliamentary work and spent it on itself. Two courts have now said so.
The legal and political drama around Le Pen is of legitimate interest, but France’s structural problems are a more serious concern. The country’s economic malaise has become so serious and persistent that it threatens the survival of the Republic in its current form. And it is also the reason that a candidate like Le Pen, even threatened with an ankle tag as a convicted criminal, stands a chance of being elected president in 2027.
France now owes about €3.5 trillion, or 117 percent of its annual economic output. Just the interest cost €66 billion last year, more than the entire defence budget, and the Cour des Comptes, their auditor general, warns it could exceed €100b by 2029.
For years, low interest rates have allowed French governments to postpone the reckoning. Whenever a political conflict loomed, French governments spent money to make it go away. What taxes could not cover, borrowing did, so the question of who would eventually pay never had to be answered.
That era is now over. The interest bill now eats into everything, and every budget reopens the fight over who gets what.
France passed this year’s budget only in February, after successive fiscal battles had brought down the governments of Michel Barnier and François Bayrou. Their successor, Sébastien Lecornu, succeeded only after making substantial concessions, particularly on pensions, to secure Socialist abstention.
Some blame the constitution, and it is true that the Fifth Republic was established on an expectation of majorities that no longer occur. But a Sixth Republic would not change the arithmetic. However France organises its politics, somebody has to pay, and nobody wants to.
Nor do the French want to hear about cures. When Macron lifted the retirement age from 62 to 64, the country experienced months of protests. In the end his government suspended even that modest reform until 2028, simply to survive a confidence vote.
It is a bitter result for a president who promised to drain the anger on which Le Pen’s National Rally feeds. Nine years on, his approval stands at just 18 percent in the latest YouGov barometer, and the anger is stronger than ever.
More than 30 declared and potential contenders are circling to replace Macron, an unprecedentedly crowded pre-election field. Hardly anyone still governs because everybody is auditioning for a job whose main duty will be to pay yesterday’s bills.
There is a bit of an irony in all this, not least on Bastille Day, because debt crises have shaped French history before. When we think of the French Revolution of 1789, we think of an uprising against an absolutist king, which it was. But beneath that was a state drowning in debt.
By 1788, half of the royal treasury’s income went on servicing the Crown’s debts. When further borrowing failed, the Crown was forced to summon the Estates-General, opening the political crisis that became the Revolution.
France celebrates Bastille Day every year, but perhaps its lesson, that fiscal stability is a necessary condition for political sustainability, is not yet well enough understood.
Indeed, that lesson is not even understood by Le Pen’s own party, for all its railing against the political system and the establishment. The National Rally makes a lot of political noise about grievances like crime and immigration.
But on the central question of how to reform France’s economy, the National Rally has still not presented a credible and fully costed programme capable of stabilising the public finances. Le Pen herself still favours reversing Macron’s 64-year threshold, allowing retirement between 60 and 62 depending on contribution history. Good luck with that.
Le Pen is once again her party’s candidate, in what will be her fourth presidential campaign. Her protégé Jordan Bardella would have been a legally less encumbered candidate and has cultivated a more business-friendly image. But neither of them stands for the reforms France needs.
Then again, no candidate from any of the other parties is likely to stand for such reforms either.
At this stage, the outcome of the 2027 election is unpredictable. Will France have a right-wing populist president for the first time, or will the old firewall of the establishment parties once again deliver a more mainstream president?
If it is the former, the face of the Republic would change, but under either result the economic and fiscal challenges will remain.
And on July 14, 2027, the military will once again parade down the Champs-Élysées. Even amid a grave national crisis, some traditions do not change.
Dr Oliver Hartwich is the Executive Director of The New Zealand Initiative think tank. This article was sourced HERE
What makes this year different is that the future of the Fifth Republic itself is at stake. After the 2027 election, France may be quite a different country, with a very different president.
That president may well be Marine Le Pen. Last Tuesday, a Paris appeals court upheld her conviction for channelling millions of euros of European Parliament money to her party’s staff. Part of her sentence is a year to be served under electronic monitoring with an ankle tag.
The same evening, she declared her candidacy anyway. Days before, she had said a candidate could not possibly ask a magistrate for permission every time she wanted to visit a market. Well, that was then.
She does not yet wear the tag, because her appeal to France’s highest court suspends enforcement of the sentence. The judges want to rule before the election, so Le Pen will start her campaign without knowing whether her sentence will commence before she finishes it.
The French press has talked about little else since the verdict. Yet the tag is the least important thing happening in France.
The conviction itself was fair enough. Le Pen’s party took money meant for parliamentary work and spent it on itself. Two courts have now said so.
The legal and political drama around Le Pen is of legitimate interest, but France’s structural problems are a more serious concern. The country’s economic malaise has become so serious and persistent that it threatens the survival of the Republic in its current form. And it is also the reason that a candidate like Le Pen, even threatened with an ankle tag as a convicted criminal, stands a chance of being elected president in 2027.
France now owes about €3.5 trillion, or 117 percent of its annual economic output. Just the interest cost €66 billion last year, more than the entire defence budget, and the Cour des Comptes, their auditor general, warns it could exceed €100b by 2029.
For years, low interest rates have allowed French governments to postpone the reckoning. Whenever a political conflict loomed, French governments spent money to make it go away. What taxes could not cover, borrowing did, so the question of who would eventually pay never had to be answered.
That era is now over. The interest bill now eats into everything, and every budget reopens the fight over who gets what.
France passed this year’s budget only in February, after successive fiscal battles had brought down the governments of Michel Barnier and François Bayrou. Their successor, Sébastien Lecornu, succeeded only after making substantial concessions, particularly on pensions, to secure Socialist abstention.
Some blame the constitution, and it is true that the Fifth Republic was established on an expectation of majorities that no longer occur. But a Sixth Republic would not change the arithmetic. However France organises its politics, somebody has to pay, and nobody wants to.
Nor do the French want to hear about cures. When Macron lifted the retirement age from 62 to 64, the country experienced months of protests. In the end his government suspended even that modest reform until 2028, simply to survive a confidence vote.
It is a bitter result for a president who promised to drain the anger on which Le Pen’s National Rally feeds. Nine years on, his approval stands at just 18 percent in the latest YouGov barometer, and the anger is stronger than ever.
More than 30 declared and potential contenders are circling to replace Macron, an unprecedentedly crowded pre-election field. Hardly anyone still governs because everybody is auditioning for a job whose main duty will be to pay yesterday’s bills.
There is a bit of an irony in all this, not least on Bastille Day, because debt crises have shaped French history before. When we think of the French Revolution of 1789, we think of an uprising against an absolutist king, which it was. But beneath that was a state drowning in debt.
By 1788, half of the royal treasury’s income went on servicing the Crown’s debts. When further borrowing failed, the Crown was forced to summon the Estates-General, opening the political crisis that became the Revolution.
France celebrates Bastille Day every year, but perhaps its lesson, that fiscal stability is a necessary condition for political sustainability, is not yet well enough understood.
Indeed, that lesson is not even understood by Le Pen’s own party, for all its railing against the political system and the establishment. The National Rally makes a lot of political noise about grievances like crime and immigration.
But on the central question of how to reform France’s economy, the National Rally has still not presented a credible and fully costed programme capable of stabilising the public finances. Le Pen herself still favours reversing Macron’s 64-year threshold, allowing retirement between 60 and 62 depending on contribution history. Good luck with that.
Le Pen is once again her party’s candidate, in what will be her fourth presidential campaign. Her protégé Jordan Bardella would have been a legally less encumbered candidate and has cultivated a more business-friendly image. But neither of them stands for the reforms France needs.
Then again, no candidate from any of the other parties is likely to stand for such reforms either.
At this stage, the outcome of the 2027 election is unpredictable. Will France have a right-wing populist president for the first time, or will the old firewall of the establishment parties once again deliver a more mainstream president?
If it is the former, the face of the Republic would change, but under either result the economic and fiscal challenges will remain.
And on July 14, 2027, the military will once again parade down the Champs-Élysées. Even amid a grave national crisis, some traditions do not change.
Dr Oliver Hartwich is the Executive Director of The New Zealand Initiative think tank. This article was sourced HERE
1 comment:
Certainly the French people will be much more active than the Aoteaora sheeple.
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.