Pensions: Nupes spreads its differences in the Assembly in the home stretch

Four thousand four hundred seventy-eight. This is the number of amendments that remained to be examined in the Assembly this Thursday at the start of the afternoon before being able to reach article 7 of the bill of pension reform , the one that pushes back the legal age of departure from 62 to 64, as union leaders have still wished since Albi where they were demonstrating. These were mainly amendments from the deputies of La France insoumise (LFI).

Suffice to say that LFI held an essential key this Thursday to accelerate – or not – the debates by deciding to withdraw – or not – these thousands of amendments. And the tendency, after a tweet from Jean-Luc Mélenchon, was to refuse the debate on this article 7.

Sharp differences within the Nupes

The other parties of the Nupes, the alliance of the left, were not at all on this wavelength. They continued to withdraw their amendments to move the discussion forward. This Thursday, the communist group thus announced to withdraw all its amendments up to article 7. Like the ecologists. The Socialists have removed 90% of theirs.

But the LFI group did not follow this strategy. It must be said that Jean-Luc Mélenchon, thus showing in broad daylight the sharp differences within the Nupes as well as with the unions, tweeted this Thursday afternoon, after the withdrawal of the Communist amendments: “Incomprehensible withdrawal of the amendments of the PCF. Why rush to Article 7? The rest of the law doesn’t count? Eager to get beaten? »

“The masks are falling,” reacted Renaissance MP Marc Ferracci, castigating “LFI’s strategy of obstruction assumed in broad daylight”. In the majority, however, there remained a certain caution – “The LFIs are unpredictable”, according to a Renaissance deputy -, but they saw in this declaration by Jean-Luc Mélenchon a boon for them, an admission of weakness for him. “It is the admission that they will be beaten. »

“I don’t know if it’s a tweet or a ‘DM fail’ [un message privé rendu public par erreur, NDLR] “, mocked a Gabriel Attal with a big smile on his lips, pointing to the now sparse benches of LFI’s partners “probably disgusted by this strategy”.

A few passes of arms

If there was a lot of talk this Thursday about tax increases, capital taxation, the return of the ISF to the benches of the Nupes, there was also a lot of talk about the revaluation of the minimum pension for a full career. as well as long careers, with a few skirmishes between the benches of Nupes and the Minister of Labor, Olivier Dussopt, or that of Public Accounts, Gabriel Attal.

PS deputy Jérôme Guedj went to the Social Security Department for documentary checks. And attacked Olivier Dussopt on the clarifications made to the revaluation of the minimum pension. Because he discovered, he said, that “only 13,179 new pensioners will receive these 100 euros [de revalorisation] in 2024”. And not 40,000. Olivier Dussopt replied that it is indeed 40,000 new retirees “by 2030” who will affect it.

On long careers, the benches of Nupes but also the deputy LR Aurélien Pradié had a great time asking for explanations on the duration of contributions requested from long careers, government table in hand, and repeating: “44 , 43, 44, 43, 44…” To which Gabriel Attal retorted: “Long careers are article 8. We will give the answers in article 8. You have picked up a good pace this morning, you are less obstructive, we can do it. ” Or not.

Incidents or surprises

Because this Friday is the last day of examination scheduled for first reading in the Assembly by the use of article 47-1 of the Constitution on this amending Social Security financing bill (PLFSSR). Even without a vote, the government can send the initial text to the Senate, possibly accompanied by amendments adopted with a favorable opinion from the government.

If there is no doubt that the examination will not be able to go to the end of the text, the majority expected this Thursday that there would be incidents or surprises until Friday midnight. It was not excluded however that the examination reaches the end of the first part – just before article 7 – and thus allows its vote, if the ally LR, often judged as “unreliable” by a tenor of the majority, vote sufficiently in favor. As for a vote on Article 7, it seemed this Thursday almost impossible to achieve.