The reform of the Constitution proposed by LR is “unthinkable”, according to Dussopt

“It’s the opposite of European construction and it obviously requires a constitutional revision, something quite impossible in my eyes” … The reform of the Constitution wanted by LR to toughen France’s immigration policy is “unthinkable”, a declared Monday the Minister of Labor Olivier Dussopt, who will begin discussions with Gérard Darmanin around a hypothetical bill.

Asked about franceinfothe Minister also fears that such a reform “would single out and stigmatize France’s position within the European Union”.

Republicans up the ante

Olivier Dussopt, responsible for leading discussions with his Interior counterpart on a bill dedicated to immigration which for weeks has been the subject of a waltz of hesitation from the executive, therefore closes the door to one of LR’s shock proposals unveiled this weekend in terms of migration.

Essential partner of a possible parliamentary compromise on the future text of the government, the party of Eric Ciotti raises the stakes by asking in particular for a reform of the Constitution which in migration matters, would allow France to leave the European treaties.

“Let’s leave the necessary time for this discussion”

LR intends to include in the Constitution “the possibility of derogating from the primacy of treaties and European law (…) when “the fundamental interests of the Nation” are at stake”, considering that immigration falls into this box. LR also intends to “elevate the principle of assimilation to constitutional rank”.

If this “perspective is not achievable”, Olivier Dussopt nevertheless wants to believe in a compromise that is always possible. “Let’s leave the time necessary for this discussion (with the parties and political groups) that we will start in the coming days,” he commented on franceinfo.

The fact remains that on the project of regularizations on the so-called “in tension” professions, one of the pillars of the future bill, the Minister of Labor reaffirms, unlike the LRs, that it is not a question of a “call for air”.

source site