The problem with overhyping things is that you then risk disappointing the expectations you yourself have created. Before even setting foot in Matignon, Michel Barnier warned of upside-down public accounts and “an alarming financial situation for the country”. It was said, announced, the budget he was going to present would be one of seriousness and rigor – “austerity” for his left-wing political opponents – and the country would learn to tighten its belt.
When this proposed finance law arrives? 40 billion savings in public spending, i.e. a drop of “only” 1.1% in the state budget. All that for that? “For the French State, that’s already a lot,” adds Philippe Crevel, economist and director of the Cercle des Epargnants. “Our country is more accustomed to seeing its spending increase by 2% each year,” recalls the expert. “So what Michel Barnier did was to reduce the state budget by 3% in total. Insufficient, but already a lot.”
“Largely insufficient” to resolve the deficit
Marc Touati, macro-economist, is much less lenient: “It’s dramatic! But unfortunately this is the sad fate that the country’s leaders have reserved for us for decades. » Some figures to attest to his fatalistic observation. From 1980 to 2023, French public spending exploded by 649%, taking inflation into account). Over the same period, French GDP in value increased by 530%. “120 points difference! Let us not forget that in normal times, public spending is there to support growth and therefore implies a stronger increase in GDP. However, in France, the exact opposite is observed. »
Philippe Crevel also admits: “It is largely insufficient to resolve the deficit, of course. But we cannot move the state budget so easily, as there are unavoidable expenses. Just the salaries of civil servants… – 1.1% is already a lot, despite the constraints. »
Time too short or praise of long time?
To hit the state’s taps harder, we would need a weapon that Michel Barnier did not have at his disposal: time. In office for only a month and five days, the Prime Minister “has not been able to implement structural reforms, for example conceding sectors to the private sector or improving productivity gains, which will be necessary in view of the economic state of France”, estimates the director. The man from Matignon himself complained today about the short time taken to prepare his budget, which he considers “perfectible”: “Never has a Prime Minister had to create a budget for France in one period 15 days. »
Sylvain Bersinger, economist at the Asterès firm, conversely sees in this “low percentage” of -1.1% the praise of the long term: “It is of course insufficient to resolve the deficit, but we must not put too much austerity at once otherwise you destroy growth. » Greece, which had undergone an XXL austerity plan in 2010, has in spite of itself become the typical example that tightening the belt too much at once can amount to purely and simply hanging its economy.
A budget that struggles to convince
“In terms of macroeconomic size, – 1.1% of the budget for a machine as gigantic as the State does not seem so bad to me. A shock that is too brutal leads to a recession,” continues the expert. “If the ministries no longer hire, if retirements are not renewed, we also deprive ourselves of gains. This is why soft and progressive austerity seems preferable to me. »
But with this slightly cut budget, doesn’t the Prime Minister risk worrying both the supporters of austerity and the left? The Court of Auditors itself admitted its doubts about the ability of the proposed finance law to bring the deficit below 5% in 2025, the government’s announced objective.
A skepticism that Marc Touati obviously shares: “This reminds me of Bruno Le Maire’s forecasts for two years. We are constantly promised a reduction in the deficit and ultimately it increases.
For 2025, to the extent that economic activity will decline further and the interest burden on the debt will approach 70 billion euros, returning to less than 6% seems unattainable. » This evening, Sylvain Maillard, Renaissance MP, was just as unconfident about the political popularity of the proposal: “We are not going to lie to each other, there will be no vote at the end, there will be a 49.3. »