Benjamin Morel is a lecturer in public law at the University of Paris
2
Panthéon-Assas.
Latest work published
:
“
France in crumbs
”
(Éditions du Cerf, 2023).
LE FIGARO. – During the appointment of Rachida Dati to the Ministry of Culture at the beginning of January, the left castigated the “right-wing” of the government. Does the arrival this Thursday of Nicole Belloubet at the Ministry of National Education – described as a “disastrous signal” by Jordan Bardella – allow this accusation to be refuted?
Benjamin MOREL.
We note in fact an orientation to the right, not so much in number, but in influence.
In addition to the leading figures Bruno Le Maire, Gérald Darmanin and Catherine Vautrin, the appointment of Emmanuel Moulin at the head of the Prime Minister's office appears to be the clearest sign of a rather Sarkozy orientation of the government, in which the presence of Rachida Dati represents more of a symbol than an additional weight.
The majority left and its allies are rather badly off, which explains the tensions and some angry outbursts.
In this context, Nicole Belloubet hardly seems to constitute a significant rebalancing element.
Certainly, she comes from the left, but she does not have any real weight in the parliamentary majority which would allow her to strongly influence the decisions of Matignon and the Élysée, as François Bayrou could have done.
Nor does she represent a prominent figure in public opinion.
In addition, she arrives in a ministry of which Gabriel Attal has made a symbol and for which he wishes to set the tone.
If we can qualify the vision formerly developed by Nicole Belloubet as “left”, the divisions on education only partially corresponding to political divisions, she has little chance of being able to promote and embody this type of solution.
At best, she will be a discreet minister pursuing a policy that is not her own, at worst, she will be content to note her inability to act on her ministry.
Blanquer, Pap Ndiaye, Gabriel Attal, Amélie Oudéa-Castéra and Nicole Belloubet... Is National Education the symbol of “at the same time Macronist”?
The problem is, in fact, not so much the nature of the policy that will be pursued, but rather the coherence of the signal sent.
If a public policy were to mark the reorientation of macronism towards a “republican” line, focused on the return to authority and fundamentals, it was that of National Education.
If the minister's writings and her positions on the Mila affair do not necessarily presage her action, especially if we take into account the appointment of Éric Thiers at the head of her cabinet, they nevertheless create uncertainty on one of the few points identified, or even on the only clear line of the new government.
What characterized Gabriel Attal was authority and secularism at school;
an idea very popular in public opinion and which stood out as a fact, even for its opponents.
This perception will have difficulty lasting after this appointment.
The RN and LR will easily find reason to criticize the positioning of the Prime Minister by targeting Nicole Belloubet, thus gaining media space that the government's communication strategy was trying to compete with them.
To contest it on the right, Emmanuel Macron took the risk of weakening his relationship with the left fringe of his electorate and his parliamentarians.
However, it is difficult to imagine a voter from the EELV party or Raphaël Glucksmann turning to a Renaissance list, simply seduced by the nomination of Nicole Belloubet, rue de Grenelle.
This appointment can undoubtedly be explained by a lack of human resources.
The new minister, who knows these subjects and has the dual quality, rare in Macron, of understanding both administration and politics, is, on paper, not a bad choice.
But in terms of political narrative, it's obviously rather disastrous.
Should we see behind François Bayrou's bloodshed a political strategy with a view to 2027? Can he break up the majority?
There is probably a skin tone in François Bayrou's reaction, and we should not rationalize to the extreme political life which is also imbued with emotions.
The lack of consultation within the MoDem seems to demonstrate a lack of preparation.
However, if François Bayrou aims to run in 2027, he must assume a break with the head of state to distance himself from his record and his legacy, without taking responsibility for a break in the majority.
It is the curse of heads of state who cannot represent themselves, that of a “chiraquization” of the five-year term.
Emmanuel Macron is aware of this, and a large part of his action can be explained by his desire to delay this inevitable moment.
Whether it is Édouard Philippe, Gérald Darmanin, Bruno Le Maire... all those who aim for the Élysée, or rally around a contender, will have to, at one time or another, stage a distancing, or even a break with the current head of state.
In politics, we must not give the feeling of inheriting, but of conquering.
Even Pompidou staged his break with de Gaulle.
Emmanuel Macron finds one revolutionary idea per quarter to relaunch his five-year term, without tangible success.
Benjamin Morel
Furthermore, it may seem early, but this reshuffle shows that we are entering a
“lame duck”
period .
Emmanuel Macron finds one revolutionary idea per quarter to relaunch his five-year term, without tangible success.
Without prejudging the Europeans, the current sequence, intended to be a launching pad towards these elections, seems rather a plunge.
Therefore, a solution must emerge quickly to bring people together.
This is what Sarkozy understood in 2002, who began to subvert the majority for his benefit as soon as he arrived in Beauvau.
However, François Bayrou's error is to neglect, in this matter, his main asset which is, contrary to what he thinks, not himself.
Its best card is the MoDem, an organized party made up of experienced political staff;
which today constitutes a rare resource.
The MoDem is also a group without which the government can no longer hold anything.
However, these deputies and these executives are not ready to follow the leader whatever the cost, especially if they believe that he is going to the wall.
The tensions within the group show that François Bayrou's strategy is creating a stir and, at this stage, is not unanimous.
Can this new government give new impetus to the five-year term or should it be read as a simple PR stunt?
This is the paradox of this affair.
This reshuffle can only be explained if we consider it as a communication move, all in all quite intelligent, aimed at relaunching a favorable dynamic even among the Europeans.
For this, we are making concessions to LR in the joint joint committee on the immigration law, at the risk of fracturing the majority, to put an end to a deleterious sequence before the month of January.
For this, a new government was appointed, managing to displease Sacha Houlié, François Bayrou, Édouard Philippe and Éric Ciotti.
In short, we more or less give up on legislating, mourning any majority.
It is a bet on a sequence that can unite the troops in a dynamic, if not winning, at least mobilizing.
It's a gamble, but why not.
The problem being that the communication was catastrophic.
All parties are in the campaign.
Jordan Bardella takes selfies all over France, and Renaissance still doesn't have a top bill.
No one disputes the center-left electorate with the Greens and Glucksmann, while François-Xavier Bellamy is offered a strong argument with the nomination of Nicole Belloubet to bring the right-wing electorate back to the fold.
The narrative of the new act of the five-year term, which was to be deployed in the speech, is drowned out in an endured media sequence, and only the measures to calm the farmers are retained.
Benjamin Morel
We are banking on momentum, but we are waiting three weeks before delivering a general policy speech, to give Emmanuel Macron time to hold a long press conference which does not make an impression, because there is nothing revolutionary about it. announce.
And to appoint little-known delegate ministers and state secretaries, who were often already there, or even did not leave their office.
Thus, the narrative of the new act of the five-year term, which was to be deployed in the speech, is drowned out in an endured media sequence, and only the measures to calm the farmers are retained.
We are betting everything on the effectiveness and performance of political action.
However, it takes a month to appoint the government, which gives the feeling of uncertainty.
This is only resolved at the extreme limit, while the ministers delegated to be reappointed reach the deadline after which they will have to choose between resigning or returning to Parliament.
We find it intelligent to carry out this reshuffle while awaiting the verdict in the trial of the MoDem assistants, knowing well that an acquittal would change the situation and the political demands of François Bayrou, and would create a crisis in the majority.
Furthermore, to govern effectively when one has sacrificed one's ability to legislate is to govern by regulation.
However, by playing the part of tight government, we take the risk of politically under-supervising the administration, which, without bad intention, needs to be closely guided to move towards the set objectives.
We are reducing the size of ministerial cabinets, even though we saw from 2017 to 2020 that this was anything but a good idea, thus weakening its ability to act on the only lever available.
All this to give the feeling of a tight government;
which leads one to wonder which communicator could have thought that this could attract even the slightest voter.
In the meantime, January was supposed to be the time for the “big meeting with the nation”, at which Emmanuel Macron seems to have stood up.