Astrid Panosyan, Renaissance MP: “The “casserolades” do not represent the majority of French people”

The period is for “casserolades”: no minister can move normally in France, some even cancel their visit, Emmanuel Macron is booed wherever he goes… Should he continue this tour of France in such an atmosphere?

The law on pensions has been promulgated, but as he himself explained recently in an exchange with the readers of the “Parisien”, the President of the Republic considers that he did not express himself sufficiently on the subject during the debate. on this reform. He does it now by going to meet the French. And this is a necessary prerequisite for presenting them with the government’s future projects. As he said, the country must now move forward.

Without a doubt. But can we in “100 days” overcome the mistrust, even the hatred that is expressed at each passage of a member of the executive?

It should first be emphasized that these “casserolades” are most often organized by groups of individuals who do not precisely represent the majority of French people. Then, the president himself admitted during his speech that there was resentment in the country. It is therefore normal for this resentment to be expressed, with respect for public freedoms and republican legality.

Finally, we must not close our eyes: there is a historical level of mistrust vis-à-vis all elected officials, and this is a French specificity. The feeling that “we don’t count, we are not listened to, we are being lied to” feeds populism throughout the world and also at home. This distrust can take the form of a dull anger that will fuel the RN vote or an electric climate in which the social acceptability of public decisions will be difficult.

Emmanuel Macron, an atmosphere of end of reign

The secretary general of the CFDT Laurent Berger spoke of a “democratic crisis”. He is right ?

I would rather speak of a crisis of representative democracy. In an unparalleled context of electoral abstention and distrust of political leaders, citizens, especially the youngest, no longer want to leave them “a blank check” for five years. This is also why the tools of the rationalized parliamentarism of the V^e République are sometimes perceived as illegitimate, even if they are perfectly legal. We need to find breathing mechanisms between political democracy, social democracy and democracy of opinion to restore citizens’ confidence in their elected representatives and allow them to participate more actively in the life of the city.

With regard precisely to the institutions, what do you expect from a possible reform mentioned during the presidential address last week?

Citizens’ conventions can be an interesting tool, as demonstrated by the fact that the debate on the end of life has been held well, which obliges us, as parliamentarians, to continue the discussion. But in my opinion, the real subject is that of the crisis of public action. The inflation of standards and the multiplicity of stakeholders on the same subject dilute responsibilities and, consequently, responsiveness and speed to act. There are too many “coxswains” facing “oarsmen” who are exhausted trying to move forward. The resignation of 1,300 mayors since 2020 is a very worrying sign in this respect: it is clearly the sign of the difficulties they face on the ground, coming from both the State and their constituents. Everyone must have more confidence in the actors to act where the decision must be made.

“There are no winners or losers,” said Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne after the validation of the essentials of the pension reform by the Constitutional Council. Do you share this opinion?

Yes. I totally agree. Everyone has been weakened in recent weeks.

But despite everything, the unions lost…

France is a living organism: when one part is affected, the whole is not going well. This is why the question of work is essential. It goes through a job that pays, public services that work and respect by all of the common rule. We have to make ends meet: social justice and republican authority. Today, to rethink work, to succeed in the challenge of carbon-free reindustrialisation, we need both the economic world and the world of work. We need to find the right balance between representative democracy and social democracy.

The Republic bogged down: how can Macron govern now?

According to Laurent Berger, to reconnect with the unions, it would first be necessary to define a working method. He put forward the idea of ​​a “co-construction”. A priori, it is not really the method of Emmanuel Macron who prefers consultation, even simple consultation…

The idea of ​​co-construction does not shock me. It just doesn’t fit into French culture. I therefore believe more in the power of social negotiation: on the basis of a course and a timetable set by the executive, the various parties establish a diagnosis and find convergent solutions, without either sweeping under the rug what opposes them. Agreements resulting from social negotiations often give greater legitimacy to texts intended for Parliament.

Is this the way to understand the “new alliances” of which the president spoke?

Exactly. Take, for example, the case of the national agreement on the sharing of added value which was signed a few weeks ago by the employers and all the trade unions with the exception of the CGT. It brings real progress. The President and the Prime Minister intend to give it a rapid legislative translation. This method could be applied to the future Labor law. We take more time, but we go further.

After pensions, a minimum law on the sharing of value?

Is there, in your opinion, a risk of union radicalization after the announced departure of the “reformist” Laurent Berger from the head of the CFDT? Will the task not be more complicated for the executive?

I have a lot of respect for Laurent Berger. He made the CFDT the first trade union center in the country and he marked the whole of the social movement with his democratic and reformist imprint. It will be necessary to be vigilant in the face of the attempts at political recovery, so far unsuccessful, of La France insoumise. But we have to trust the continuity of trade union organizations and the richness of their contributions to public debate.

Among the priority files listed by the president, apart from the question of work, there is school. The Minister of National Education wants to reinforce social diversity there and wants to impose quotas in private education under contract. What do you think ?

The question of social diversity is important, because there is a great sociological disparity between establishments. But we must first ask ourselves the question of why so many parents want to enroll their children in private education. No doubt because they have the feeling that the school of the Republic is not there. I am thinking for example, with regard to college, of the abandonment in 2015 of European classes, or of the weakening of the teaching of Latin and Greek, which has accelerated the flight to private establishments.

Pap Ndiaye put to the test of the private sector

The priority must therefore be to improve the transmission of knowledge and the recognition due to our teachers, which the president has announced by adding the autonomy of the establishments. In short, to make public school attractive again.

After the legislative elections last year, François Bayrou pleaded for the future Prime Minister to have a “political” profile, and for more “real” politicians within the government. Should the proportion of ministers from civil society be reduced?

I do not oppose politicians from civil society and elected officials. When you have carried out associative, entrepreneurial, salaried or union activities, you may not be elected, but you have a real knowledge of a subject or a given territory. It is also very valuable.

What seems to me essential, on the other hand, is to remember that a political leader is not an expert, confined to his specialty. A politician is someone who is able to link together the country’s problems and keep a clear vision of the course towards which we want to go. He must know how to listen and pick up weak signals before deciding, without locking himself in a sociological bubble; know how to breathe energy and get a whole collective on board. I believe that politics is not a profession, as is often said. It is rather a know-how that we put at the service of our fellow citizens.

“She does not want to go on pensions”: for Elisabeth Borne, a new trial period

In recent weeks, we have witnessed a certain cacophony within the government, personal initiatives, to the point that the Prime Minister had to call some of its members to order, such as Eric Dupond-Moretti or Marlène Schiappa who posed in “Playboys”. Did Elisabeth Borne do well?

Power is to serve. To be an elected representative or a minister is to be entrusted with the trust of our fellow citizens. It is a function that obliges.

Should we also change the mode of governance of the executive? Should the Elysée and Matignon change their methods of government?

To work well with a relative majority in the Assembly, you need either a coalition government contract, which is not in French culture, or a text-by-text majority. This last method can give the feeling of a lack of clarity on the meaning of our action. It is for this reason that the President and the Prime Minister recalled our course: work, public services, republican order. But this method has already enabled us to make progress on subjects as varied as nuclear energy or unemployment insurance.

In the National Assembly, beyond the natural disagreements that may persist between the different political groups, we will have to take into account the amendments of the oppositions when they seem judicious to us, and not reject them, especially when, on our side , we present about the same. This is the approach that seems to me the most constructive in the current situation. No one, on any side, has a monopoly on good ideas.