the fracture is somewhat hollowed, Wednesday, May 25, between the government and its majority in the Assembly national. The statements of Socialist parliamentarians saying ready to study a text rewriting the labor law, immediately swept away by the government, have shown how the standoff hardens about the polemic. Why Francois Hollande and Manuel Valls did they insist on the firmness of a text which crystallizes social protest in France?
Specifically, with these punches actions and if this continues over time, is that the government may assign and return to the labor law or cancel
Nicolas Chapuis: Currently, the government expressed on several occasions its intention to yield nothing on the text. Manuel Valls reiterated just a few minutes to the National Assembly. The spokesman of the government, Stéphane Le Foll, on leaving the cabinet, did the same. It seems unthinkable, at present, the government removes this law. The real question is: Does it remains some leeway to negotiate the content of the text
Read: Labour Bill: the “boss” PS deputies seeking to gather his troops and rally FO
How is the initiative of Bruno Le Roux?
Bruno Le Roux, president of the PS group in the national Assembly , proposed to work rewriting of Article 2 of the Act, which currently provides that enterprise agreements may take precedence over sectoral agreements. This is a small test of strength between the government and its majority.
From the beginning, members were struck by the way the text was constructed. Many of them remain convinced that it is far from being a “balance” between flexibility and security of the workers’ course. The episode of 49.3 still has a little increased tension. Bruno Le Roux, when he proposed a rewrite, reflects the nervousness of his own group
Read. Cacophony in the majority on Article 2 of the Bill work
Why this attitude of firmness of the government? How can we explain it?
First of all … conviction. Manuel Valls and Hollande are convinced that lifting of what they see as bottlenecks in the labor market is needed to allow the French economy to take off again. This is a major disagreement with any part of the left. The first version of the law Khomri El inspired by Emmanuel Macron and Matignon, went much further in this ambition.
Then, for the sake of credibility. If decline in labor law, the legitimacy of government would be immediately jeopardized. Manuel Valls has built its image on two pillars: reformism and firmness. If it fell against the CGT, it shows its inability to reform and proves that firmness is only façade
Read also:. Challenging the labor law: the arm iron between the executive and the CGT
What most risk in case of withdrawal of the text?
Technically, she risks nothing … a majority may very well decide to go back on a text. But politically, the consequences would be extremely serious. Manuel Valls, who has invested in this text, for the government, which would be discredited, and the Socialist majority in the National Assembly, which would have no consistency. But we are still far from the scenario of a withdrawal of the law at present.
the will to maintain law work despite a massive rejection of the population is she a will of President Holland demonstrate a capacity of rigor and intransigence in view of the 2017 presidential? Indeed, it has often been described as the president of the compromise, with the success we know it, this cap change is there a new electoral strategy?
Yes, the Head of State wants to show, through this law, its capacity to reform. Especially vis-à-vis Brussels. We must not forget that the European Commission has asked France to make reforms in exchange for a kind look on deficits. In the eyes of the commissioners, the El Khomri law is the “minimum” that France can do. In addition, François Hollande believes that this law is not so unpopular than that and it piggyback on other issues. The government estimates that the CGT will be isolated on this issue and the strategy of the showdown will lose to the trade union center.
By resorting to 49.3, the government s’ is it not condemned to [always] “push through” ? Is a negotiation still possible despite the use of this procedure?
Yes, the 49.3 has tense debate. The government’s attitude has frustrated some of the “swamp” the PS group, the Legitimist deputies who may from time to time to ask questions about the government line.
But a negotiation is always possible . The text will indeed pass the Senate (where the line goes all unravel), then return to the National Assembly. The government will propose again the text. It may, at that time, renegotiate writing some articles. This is the challenge the small current iron arm between MPs and the government. But Manuel Valls can also decide again to 49.3.
Will Holland will risk a referendum on labor law?
C ‘ is highly unlikely. He knows that voters rarely respond to the question and prefer to punish those in power. Given its level of unpopularity, he has no illusions about the outcome of such consultation.
Faced with this social conflict, the Socialist Party he will burst ? And why Martine Aubry does does not it ranks side slingers while this law seems at odds with his political position?
You touch on the crux of the debate in the Assembly. Part of aubrystes members are strongly opposed to the law. But they do not want at the same time put too troubled Francois Hollande. This is the dilemma of Martine Aubry since the beginning of the five-year period: she always had resentment against François Hollande, but believes he has the best defense in a power grab in the left Valls online she hates more
See also:. After 49.3: that weigh the “rebellious” in the majority?
Left to push through, why not do it with the first version of the law, which was hailed as a genuine reform?
When the first version text output is even more legitimists PS deputies rebelled. You can try to force a passage against a part of your majority, not against all … Hence the second version that allowed the government to rally the majority of his own group.
You say,” In addition François Hollande considers that this law is not as unpopular as that. “What really? It is true that recent events have not been mass participation while mobilizing union power is maximum.
It is difficult to measure. The latest polls show that a majority of French are against the bill. But the protests are not monsters and blockages are for now operated by a minority. The government hopes that the wrath of users will turn to term against the CGT. The calculation is risky. A survey of the Paris this morning shows that, for now, in the minds of the French, it is the government that is responsible for the situation.
Read also: Editorial: the challenge of collective intelligence?