Sweet revenge for an institution that a Prime Minister had described as an
“anomaly”.
Brilliant justification for a bicameralism often decried by an opinion that does not understand why two different assemblies should do the same work on the same text.
On the pension reform, the course in the Senate will in no way resemble that in the National Assembly.
After fifteen days of noise, fury and horrors at the Palais Bourbon, from which we especially remembered the obstruction and the insults of a part of the left, we will finally debate at the Palais du Luxembourg the substance of the bill.
In all likelihood, this discussion should end on March 12 with a vote on the whole text or, at the very least, on its essential articles, starting with the one that postpones the starting age from 62 to 64 years old. .
If there was an "anomaly", it is indeed in the National Assembly that it took place, with the inability to go as far as the vote which is nevertheless the raison d'être of the parliamentary mandate
This article is for subscribers only.
You have 71% left to discover.
Flash Sale -70%
Offer available until February 28.
Without engagement.
I ENJOY IT
Already subscribed?
Login
