The participation rates in the last presidential election prove that there is a disinterest in some French people for politics, at least for politicians. While some polls are doing well, such as the municipal ones, others on the other hand suffer from a disconcerting abstention, more than 50% for the legislative elections of 2022. What about the senatorial elections? Spoiler alert: it’s even worse! 20 minutes tried to find out why the French do not care so much about this pillar of our institutions.
“Ah well, it’s soon the senatorial elections”, is surprised Christine, a 67-year-old retiree. This Lille resident finds it a bit strange not to have been asked for this election. Same thing for Alexia, 20, for whom the September deadline is a discovery. “I read somewhere that this election was to be held soon”, assures Jean-Pierre, also 67 years old. Except that it dries on the terms of the ballot. No need to throw stones at these three Lille residents in particular since none of the passers-by met on Tuesday in the city center of Lille were able to answer us.
“A vote between people who do politics”
“It does not interest anyone because it is an indirect election, by electors”, explains Pierre Mathiot, political scientist and director of Sciences Po Lille. Indeed, senators are elected by indirect universal suffrage for a six-year term. This assembly is renewed by half every three years. And, above all, it is therefore not the French who will be called to the polls, but “grand electors”, designated or elected within local authorities, among deputies and senators. “It is an election considered by the French as a ballot between people who do politics”, analyzes the political scientist.
We can therefore understand that the vote in itself does not fascinate the crowds. That being said, the institution itself remains a mystery to those interviewed. “There is a real gap between the lack of interest in this election and the objective importance of the Senate,” laments Pierre Mathiot. “We saw in particular, during the vote on the pension reform, that the Senate had an important role,” he continues. The way in which the debates are conducted is very different from the Assembly, which is more calm. This is the idea that Jean-Pierre has of it, who believes that the senators “are able to ease tensions, unlike the Assembly where the deputies fight like lackeys”.
“Politics is badly taught”
What also emerges from our witnesses is a lack of understanding of how the institutions work. Alexia regrets it: “In the final year, we just had a small chapter on it, it’s not enough. Politics is poorly taught, if we are not interested in it, we do not understand anything, ”she admits. As a result, on the role of the Senate, everyone generally responds that the Senate “is used to pass laws”. It’s not false. At least in part.
There is this history of legislative shuttle that makes a bill pass from one assembly to another until a consensual text emerges and is voted on. “What you also need to know is that in the event of a disagreement between the two chambers, it is the National Assembly which has the last word”, notes the political scientist. This is the content ofarticle 44 of the Constitution. Hence the question of the usefulness of the Senate. “Of course we could make a reform, either to abolish the Senate, or to change its representativeness. But I don’t believe it, it won’t change, ”slices the boss of the IEP.
Basically, if the Senate has the same political color as the majority in the Assembly, it is not a counter-power. And if its color is different, the Assembly can dispense with its consent. For the pension reform, the Senate, mainly on the right and center-right, voted the text of the government without amending it much, with the exception of the development of the “long career” device. But a senate on the left would not necessarily have been a guarantee of openness: “In 1920, the Senate, which then had the last word under the Third Republic, had blocked women’s right to vote which had been adopted by the deputies”, recalls Pierre Mathiot.