The deputies must adopt Tuesday, without surprise, the constitutional bill.
First step towards the referendum desired by the Head of State in order to include in Article 1 of the Constitution that France
"guarantees the preservation of the environment and biological diversity and the fight against climate change"
.
"It is a vote which must overcome the divisions"
, judged Monday Pieyre-Alexandre Anglade, the LREM reporter of the guest text of the "Talk Le Figaro".
The vote of right-wing deputies will be particularly scrutinized.
Will it prefigure the positioning of their fellow LR senators?
Which, in the majority in the Luxembourg Palace, hold the power to bring the referendum to a successful conclusion.
Because for the French to be called to the polls, the constitutional bill must first be voted in conformity (identically) by the two Chambers.
Read also:
The climate law begins its complicated path in the National Assembly
Before the solemn vote at the Palais Bourbon, LR deputies will discuss their strategy in a group meeting.
“The Republicans will not fall into the crude trap set by Emmanuel Macron, making us adversaries of the environment.
This text is useless and dangerous but we will let it go to the referendum so that the French disavow it ”
, indicates to
Figaro
the deputy of Vaucluse Julien Aubert, who works at LR on ecological questions.
If he advocates abstention, some of his colleagues will vote against, like the deputy for Manche Philippe Gosselin.
This trained lawyer points to a
"strong legal risk"
which will lead to
"a paralysis of the economy and of initiative"
.
During parliamentary debates, many deputies warned against too strict drafting of Article 1.
Thus, Marc Le Fur (Côtes-d'Armor) defended the replacement of the word
“guarantee”
by
“preserve”
.
Without success.
Lots of skepticism
Even within the majority, the editorial staff questioned.
"The modification of the Constitution poses, in fact, a limit to certain economic freedoms and establishes a new legal risk that companies will have to definitively integrate"
, admitted during the general discussion the deputy of the North Valérie Petit (Agir ensemble).
"It seems to me that our debates will have to provide guarantees of balance between the fight against climate change and individual rights"
, noted this convinced liberal, while specifying that her group would vote in favor of the text.
Valérie Petit wants to
"trust the judges and the principle of proportionality
".
Read also:
The Citizens' Convention distances itself from the climate law
“With the concept of guarantee, the single article implies the concept of responsibility. You will therefore increase the judicialization of environmental policy "
, insisted in the Hemicycle Julien Aubert while sarcastically:
" It is easy to proclaim yourself an ecological republic when the country has been deindustrialised and all the polluting industries have left. set up in developing countries which will then be taught lessons because they emit a lot of carbon dioxide ”
.
An approach shared by the Insubordinate François Ruffin (Somme), who demanded the inclusion in the Constitution of the sentence:
"The Republic condemns industrial relocations which continue to pollute without restriction".
Again, without success.
I am against a plebiscite on the back of ecology which will turn against it
Delphine Batho, President of Generation Ecology and Member of Parliament for Deux-Sèvres
The most fervent environmentalists approach the referendum proposal with a lot of skepticism.
President of Generation Ecology and Member of Parliament for Deux-Sèvres, Delphine Batho will vote for the constitutional bill because she is
"never against a micro-step forward"
but denounces
"a political maneuver"
of the executive at one year of the presidential election.
"I am against a plebiscite on the back of ecology which will turn against it,"
warns the former Minister of Ecology.
She also considers that it would have been preferable to include in the Constitution
"the principle of constant progression"
to prevent, for example, the temporary return of neonicotinoids.
His proposal was not accepted, the executive being attached to the initial formulation resulting from the work of the Citizen's Climate Convention.
Not sure that senators are so attached to it.
The President of the Senate, Gérard Larcher, has already indicated that he prefers the verb
“to act”
to
“guarantee”
.
If they were to change the wording of Article 1, the senators would condemn the referendum.
"The senatorial right has a more political posture than the Assembly"
, underlines a parliamentarian of the majority, who fears the arrival of the text at the Luxembourg Palace.
"For LR senators, modifying the constitutional bill will be a means of existing"
, notes the same elected official. This is not to displease the executive, which wants above all to keep the urban center-right electorate - increasingly sensitive to ecology - by convincing them that LR is in a strictly conservative position.