Macron puts his transformative momentum to the test with the pension reform

It is the moment of truth for the French president, Emmanuel Macron, who came to power in 2017 under the banner of economic and social reformism, but who, until now, had stumbled upon the most ambitious and complicated of his reforms: that of the pensions.

Prime Minister Élisabeth Borne presented a controversial proposal on Tuesday to increase the legal retirement age from 62 to 64 by 2030.

The second key measure is the implementation in 2027, eight years ahead of schedule, of the requirement of 43 years of contributions to collect the full pension.

The proposal must be debated in the coming weeks in the National Assembly, where the parties that support Macron lost an absolute majority in the legislative elections in June, and in the Senate, dominated by Los Republicanos (LR), the traditional right.

With LR, who has shown his willingness to support him, Macron can push the reform through Parliament.

The problem is elsewhere: the street.

The unions, divided in the last decade due to the reforms of successive governments, have come together this time to oppose a reform that they consider unfair, unnecessary and harmful to the popular classes and people who started working very young.

The left and the extreme right are also opposed.

The Government defends the reform - which should enter into force on September 1 for its progressive application - due to the need to balance the accounts from 2030 and preserve the viability of the French model of social protection.

His detractors respond that there is no risk of bankruptcy of the system and that, in any case, the reform endangers the welfare state.

In his year-end speech, Macron summed up the underlying meaning of the reform: "We must work harder."

France is today one of its neighboring countries with a lower legal retirement age, although the real age - many French people work beyond 62 to receive full retirement - is higher.

70% of French are against the reform.

Added to inflation and economic uncertainties, the risk for the president is that the initiative could fuel social unrest.

The unions called for a day of strike and demonstrations on January 19.

“Social regression”

"The Macron-Borne reform is a serious social regression," reacted Jean-Luc Mélenchon, leader of La Francia Insumisa, the first party on the left.

Marine Le Pen, leader of the far-right National Rally party, said: "It is a moral imperative to oppose this terrible social regression."

More worrisome for the government is the opposition of Laurent Berger, general secretary of the CFDT, the largest union in France and the most reformist, usually prone to dialogue.

this weekend

.

For the CFDT, the increase in retirement at age 64 is a red line.

Only the right wing of LR and the employers' association Medef have applauded the initiative, for which it is "an essential reform to safeguard the pension system."

There are some measures to sweeten the swallow of the increase in the years of work before retirement.

One is the increase in the minimum pension to 1,200 euros per month, which will benefit some two million retirees with low pay.

Another is that those who have already worked for 44 years will be able to retire before the age of 64. Thus, those who have started working before the age of 16 will be able to retire at the age of 58;

between 16 and 18, at 60;

and between 18 and 20, at 62. Those who have had jobs that involve physical wear and tear may also retire at 62, but only with a medical examination that recognizes them as unfit for work.

The compensations are insufficient, according to the opposition and the unions.

According to Berger, "the postponement of the legal retirement age will affect workers who, during the covid, we classify as second-line, such as home maintenance workers, in the agri-food sector, in delivery, in commerce."

The hope of the opposition and the unions is that Macron will eventually back down if the French take to the streets to express their discontent.

The specter of the

- the 2018 revolt against the increase in fuel prices and against the elites of Paris - has haunted the Élysée ever since.

The government's calculation is that, even if the reform is unpopular, the French are not in the mood for large mobilizations.

And this reform can mark the legacy of the president.

It is not the first time that Macron wants to reform pensions.

He tried it between the end of 2019 and 2020 and, in fact, it was adopted in the National Assembly at the beginning of the legislative process.

But already then he was able to verify the rejection that he provoked.

Demonstrations and massive strikes paralyzed transport for weeks.

The president ended up keeping the project in a drawer when the covid-19 devastated France and Europe.

This was not the time to agitate the country further.

There was reform fatigue in France, after a first five years with reforms of the SNCF, the public railway company, the labor market or the tax on fortunes.

Europeanist and liberal reformism had been Macron's hallmark.

The pandemic stopped this momentum: in order to protect the economy and society from the virus and recession, the president took out his checkbook and put the reforms on hold.

The question then was whether the reformist Macron had disappeared forever and had given way to the statist Macron, in the best French interventionist tradition.

But he returned to the charge last spring in the campaign for the last presidential elections.

One of his promises was to raise the retirement age to 64 or 65.

Now this is one of the government's arguments to defend the legitimacy of the reform: the French knew what they were voting for.

The left replies that the reasoning is tricky.

He alleges that, if they voted for Macron, it was not to change pensions, but to prevent the far-right Marine Le Pen from reaching the presidency.

Macron was re-elected in the presidential elections, but in the legislative elections, a few weeks later, he lost an absolute majority, although the Macronistas continue to form the first bloc in number of deputies.

To pass any law, they need to ally with some opposition party or impose the measure through the unpopular route of decree.

The scope for bold reforms has narrowed.

The pensions, repeatedly postponed, could be the last of his second and last term.

If he succeeds, he will be able to say that, despite everything, there is still something of the great reformer that he once wanted to be.

Follow all the international information on

Subscribe to continue reading

Read without limits

Keep reading

I'm already a subscriber