The Assembly’s ruling coalition is experiencing significant absenteeism during budget discussions, raising concerns about its effectiveness. Opposition members mock the government, claiming their absence benefits left-wing parties. Critics argue that government MPs should be present to represent their constituents and influence budgetary outcomes. The article highlights an evident demoralization among parliamentarians, leading to frustrations about a lack of clarity and direction within the coalition, potentially paving the way for opposition victories.
The government coalition’s presence in the Assembly has noticeably dwindled since the budget discussions commenced, reflecting a concerning ‘demobilization’ that may ultimately benefit opposition parties.
This trend was evident again on Monday, during the opening of the debate on the Social Security budget, drawing derision and frustration from both the left and far-right factions.
Civil Service Minister Guillaume Kasbarian was called out by LFI coordinator Manuel Bompard, who remarked on France Inter that he should reflect on the absenteeism of his own MPs before criticizing civil servants’ attendance, especially as the government proposed reduced sick leave compensation for civil workers.
By being absent, these parliamentarians are perceived as allowing the far-left party, La France insoumise, to dominate the budget conversation, criticized RN vice-president Sébastien Chenu. MoDem president François Bayrou described the absenteeism as ‘unacceptable’, which caused some discontent among his own members.
Bas-Rhin MP Charles Sitzenstuhl expressed disappointment that his colleagues are not present enough in the Assembly, noting the left-wing groups are ‘over-mobilized’. He shared his views on Radio J, suggesting that the left is currently ‘winning the ideological battle’.
In an interview with BFMTV, Renaissance deputy Karl Olive pointed out that it’s not about competing for attendance records at the National Assembly when there is little significant work being done.
The structure of streamlined parliamentary procedures limits the ability of deputies to impact budgetary discussions significantly, especially without a majority in the Assembly. If debates extend too long, Article 47 allows the executive to forward finance bills to the Senate, which currently supports the government’s position, without requiring Assembly approval.
Additionally, the anticipated use of Article 49.3 for finalizing the budget provides the government with the authority to select which amendments will be retained.
‘Essentially, the real budget decisions will occur in the Senate,’ commented a member of the ‘common base’ in the upper house. He noted that deputies are likely thinking, ‘in any case, it will go to 49.3, nothing important will remain, so why bother spending a Saturday evening on this?’
A source from the Renaissance group mentioned that many MPs are engaging in behind-the-scenes discussions with government officials or senators, expressing confidence that the underwhelming attendance of the central bloc will not negatively impact public perception.
According to them, the more damaging scenario would be the potential for government defeats in confrontations with LR and Macronist members, as sparse attendance may trivialize the opposition’s victories.
Loss of Purpose
An RN official asserts that government MPs are making a mistake by being so absent. “People believe that MPs must be present in the chamber to vote on the budget.”
Benjamin Morel, a constitutional expert, acknowledged that their individual reasoning is understandable. He noted that it is often more strategic for them to distance themselves from a budget that negatively impacts their constituents, particularly higher socio-professional groups and retirees, allowing them to emphasize their local connections instead.
However, this behavior may contribute to an increasing anti-parliamentary sentiment. Overall, Morel suggests that the opposition might emerge stronger from this situation.
The RN is positioning itself as a party of ‘seriousness’, ‘credibility’, and ‘protection’ for those demographics that the government coalition is perceived to neglect: retirees and the middle class. Meanwhile, the left may be viewed as the alternative camp, offering a budget-focused agenda. In contrast, he describes the central bloc as ‘the camp of those who flee’, lacking a recognizable leader to unify them.
A Renaissance deputy acknowledged to AFP that the absence of colleagues is not unexpected and is evident not just in the hemicycle but also in committee and group meetings. “I don’t know any colleague who has a clear understanding of our objectives, purpose, or partnership,” he lamented, indicating a ‘loss of purpose’ and even suggesting a sense of ‘burnout’ among lawmakers.
He emphasized that the root issue lies in the failure of either Michel Barnier or their team to pursue a political agreement, resulting in a lack of clarity and direction for their efforts.