François Bayrou severely charges the strategy of Emmanuel Macron and the government.
The boss of the MoDem believes that "
nothing has been clearly explained
" in the pension reform, the government having, according to him, "
let itself be caught in a trap
", for lack of having carried "
the debate on the inevitable rebalancing of the system
”, in an interview with the
JDD
.
The absence of this debate "
is the source of all the difficulties
", considers François Bayrou, explaining "
not being able to understand why we accepted without reacting that we accredit in the minds of the French the idea that our pension system was now balanced
”.
Oppositions, “misguided minds”
Faced with "
the joke
" of the discourse of the oppositions who contest the need for refinancing the system - according to him "
misguided minds
" -, the historical ally of Emmanuel Macron deplores in particular that "
the government has not presented to the French
” the “
national accounts figures
”: “
Why?
To spare the social partners?
For the sake of reassuring Brussels?
Or out of conformity of thought?
»
"
It is our very conception of democracy that is at stake
", continues the unsuccessful three-time presidential candidate, castigating the idea of "
believing that once elected, it is the leaders who decide on their own, and that the base will have to follow, obey or resign itself to a decision taken above it
”.
Read also Pensions: support for the protest remains massive
"
No major reform can be carried out if we have not carried the requirement of total information and shared awareness
", argues Mr. Bayrou, considering that "
fractures, resistance and reluctance
" come "
when the organization of power is reduced to a confrontation between a 'top' which does not say who it is and what it wants and a base which is only asked to obey"
.
However, according to him, “
the mechanisms of control of power from above, the eternal return of the same elements of language, of the same technocratic reflexes have hindered the mission of reinventing the relationship between the base and the so-called summit”
.
CFDT's "steep approach"
On the merits, the High Commissioner for the Plan considers that it would have "
needed a much more complete plan to return to equilibrium over ten or twelve years, with efforts required not only from employees, but also from other categories of the population
", by expressing his "
suffering
" that the "
reformists
" - targeting on the one hand the CFDT, CFTC, CGC and "
large sections of FO
", on the other hand the executive - "
n' fail to find common working methods
”.
"
There are responsibilities on both sides
", he judges, pointing to
the "stiff approach
" of the CFDT "
and, on the side of the executive, the fear of being 'coined' after having made concessions
".
