Elect a Queen

This morning on, France Inter, Jean Pierre Rafarin (ex Premier Ministre under Chirac) and Martine Aubry (Secretary of the Socialist Party) were quoted as calling into question the idea that the President and the assembly are both elected at the same time for five years. This was a recent constitutional change, just before the 2007 Election Presidentielle, because previously the President was elected on a seven year cycle and the Assembly on five years. This often led to “La Cohabitation” with the President belonging to a different party from the Prime Minister, which was thought to be a bad idea because the Government was not able to act in a coherent and concerted way.

With the harmonisation of the two terms of office, and the personality of Sarkozy, we have a different situation. The role of the Prime Minister is reduced, whilst the role of the President is augmented. But the Assembly can’t sack the President, they can only change the Prime Minister, and changing the Prime Minister would make no difference if the President was still the same and was “hyperactif” like Sarkozy. So without proposing a solution, Sarkozy’s critics are expressing the view that “Le Quinquennat” does not work as it was intended.

But what is the answer? If France reverts to the situation as it was before, then the problems that were observed before will recur. If the terms of office of the President and the Assembly are displaced by two or three years, given the French tendency to elect alternately left and right wing governments (La Pendule), there is likely to be a permanent state of “Cohabitation” in which nothing gets done. It was Chirac who said “La France est un pays très conservatif” and perhaps I could forgive myself for thinking that this would suit the many French people who like to resist change at all levels of society and at every opportunity. “Il n’y a pas de petites luttes”!!

But I have found a solution! It is a solution which is at the same time practical, lucrative, European and which would raise the status of France in the eyes of the world. Why not elect a Queen? It would allow France to express its solidarité with the other countries of Europe who have constitutional monarchies such as Belgium, Denmark, Holland, Lichtenstein, Monaco, Norway, Spain, Sweden and of course the UK. It also would solve the difficult problem of how to provide a Head of State, who would not interfere in politics, and who can’t be sacked for political reasons, because they would have no political power!

With all the beautiful French actresses that the world knows well, like Catherine Deneuve, Juliettte Binoche, Sophie Marceau, Audrey Tatou, Isabelle Adjani and others taking part, imagine the world-wide television rights! If you were prepared to take the risk you could even invite Carl Bruni to stand. But in order to preserve the essentially non-political nature of the role, one of the principal Royal candidates, Segolene, would be barred from standing.

The campaign could start with primaries in the autumn; it could have a Christmas special, and then move on to the real election in the spring between three or four candidates. You could add “Queen for a day”, in which “les francaises ordinaires“could have the opportunity to share the lives of the actresses for a day, all ending up with meeting the incumbent President and having a treasure hunt in the Elysée Palace. If France television was given the job, I am sure that the hole in the Social Security budget would be refilled, and there would be enough left over to last for the next five years!

It would have to be made clear to the candidates that the role was purely constitutional, and that it would be a five year contract (CDD Contrat Duré Déterminé) against a defined budget but, with such a high potential return, I am sure that a deal could be struck with the successful candidate which would satisfy all parties.

And then, once she was elected, the tabloid press in all European countries could have a field day digging up stories about past affairs and indiscretions and the paparazzi would make a fortune snapping topless pictures of the Queen whilst she was on holiday. It would be “la fête en permanence”.

This would then, of course, open up the role of Prime Minister to be both the head of the government and the leader of his or her party, and the Assembly would have the right to pass a vote of no confidence and change him or her whenever they wished.

Tony Blair speaks French doesn’t he, what about Helen Mirren?

Presidentielle 2007 - From your French Political Correspondent

Two weeks is a long time in politics. Nearly two weeks ago I wrote about Francois Bayrou (UDF centre right) implying that he was irrelevant, since he was in third place at only 17% in the opinion polls, and he was unlikely to get elected. He has risen steadily since then and Le Monde (9 March 2007) was quoting support for him now standing at 21%, seriously challenging Segolene Royal at 24% and Nicholas Sarkozy at 29%. The Socialists are worried to the point that their spokesman said on France Inter (10 March), that if Bayrou beats Royal on the first round, he should withdraw so that France is offered a true left of centre alternative to Sarkozy. French journalists are so well trained and respectful that no one laughed!

There are two rounds of voting for the Présidentielle. For a long time I have been trying to understand the rules for the second round, so finally I looked them up and they are very simple. If a candidate does not get a majority of the votes cast in the first round, then there is a second round with only the top two candidates. Whoever wins this is elected. In the same poll quoted above, people were asked who they would vote for on the second round, and the figures were Bayrou 55% against 45% for Sarkozy.

So there is now a serious possibility that Bayrou could pull ahead of Sego in the first round and win in the second. Since he is an experienced politician he is unlikely to make silly gaffes, and his platform, of being an alternative to the left – right pendulum of the last 20 years, is clearly going down well. It is after all a very simple message to sell. I shall now have to try to understand whether he has anything else to offer because I still have reservations about him. Firstly his basic left-right coalition idea is naïve and will not work. Secondly I watched one of his speeches a few weeks ago and a disproportionate length was given to education, but he had only one serious idea for helping businesses and re-launching the economy (he used to be Minister for Education). I am, however, certain that he has no grand ideas for reforming France and voting for him will be a vote for the status quo. Lastly, there was an event this week which bears on him and deserves explaining.

Simone Veil is a Grand Dame of French politics. She is Jewish and was a concentration camp survivor. She is a symbol of the re- construction of post war European politics and is said to be one of the best liked personalities in France. As a female politician, over the years, she has championed the rights of women but from a right wing rather than a left wing perspective. She was a member of the UDF, Bayrou’s party. For some years she has been on the Conseil Constitutionnel, an organisation, which amongst other things, sets the rules for elections and is non political. This week her term of office ended and on the Day of Women she announced her support for Sarkozy. In 1989, Bayrou directed her campaign for the European elections, which was considered a fiasco, and she lost. She is on record as saying that he was ineffective and their antipathy has deepened since then. Her intervention did make the television news, but we will have to wait to see whether it has made any significant impact.

There are still six weeks to go until the first round of voting on 22 April and that is a very long time in politics. I don’t think that any of the candidates are really dominating the media and they are missing opportunities. There is little of the rapid riposte and media management that we are used to, and got very tired of, in the UK. I think this is especially true of Sarkozy whose message is not getting through and needs simplifying. I wonder whether Alistair Campbell can speak French. I would say that their politics are very similar and there is still time to make an impact.

José Bové (Confédération Paysanne, Peasants Union) is in a bit of trouble. He is a colourful character on the greenish extreme left, and is one of the minority candidates who is difficult to ignore. His difficulty isn’t the fact that he has been sentenced to four months in prison for driving a JCB into the front of a MacDonald’s. Since he is out campaigning as usual, that is not his most immediate concern. His problem is that he is several hundred signatures short of the 500 that he needs to sponsor his candidature, from the 36,786 mayors in France. Until the list closes on 16 March, the CSA (Conseil Supérieur Audiovisuel) has decreed that all candidates should get equal airtime. This explains his frequent appearance on many TV discussion programmes, which I am disappointed to report, has confirmed to me that he isn’t a peasant, but a well educated politician. I look forward to seeing much less of him very soon.

Presidentielle 2007 - French vs UK Social Models

“On a more serious note I know their social model doesn't bring as much economic growth as ours and leads to even more bureaucracy than ours, but the Anglo-Saxon model does seem to be at the expense of unhappy social divisiveness. I am not sure the extra material wealth is worth it. “

I am very interested in politics, although I have never joined a political party. My interest gets more intense around election times and I must apologize in advance if you think that some of my remarks are excessive. I should stress that my negativity in what follows, towards the French socialists, does not extend to New Labour who are more realistic. (Although I did once say that I would leave the UK if Gordon Brown ever came to power, but in the end I anticipated that event by a couple of years). Here New Labour would be considered right wingers who pursue “liberal” economic policies. (“Liberal” is a real dirty word here, it’s time to invent a new one).

The problem with the comparison of the French and Anglo Saxon social models is that it is implied that they are alternatives. I believe that to be false, because the French system does not deliver greater overall contentedness and less social divisiveness.

In France the overall unemployment rate is in excess of 8% but in the banlieu, amongst the youth of immigrant families, it is more than double this. The riots of last year were, I think, due to a feeling of hopelessness amongst the youth who cannot see a future for themselves. In general there is a national feeling of malaise, a lack of confidence in the future and a real lack of opportunities for the young and the seniors (that means anyone over fifty). We have been through similar periods in the UK.

The French are also aware that their disposable income is falling year on year. Companies are using the fear of unemployment to keep wage increases lower than inflation, whilst at the same time the Social Charges have increased, and so people have less money to spend. (Because of the Jospin 35hr maximum working week you are not allowed to work longer and get paid for it if you are salaried).

There is considerable agreement on what is wrong with France, and what’s more they all say they want change but, of course, they don’t agree on what and how. They also seem to realize that another swing of the pendulum from right to left will not deliver what they want, hence the current interest in the centre candidate Francois Bayrou (UDF).

I find it strange that the French are all aware that their overall taxation rates are among the highest in Europe but they are not clamouring for them to be reduced, just saying they are too high and then quietly working on the black.

As an example of the total tax take I will quote Christiane’s niece, who is a 40 year old single mother, qualified as a speech therapist. She told me that as a member of the "professions liberales" the total deductions from every invoice she puts in are 77%. She is not a high earner, because the rates she can charge are limited by the state. As an artisan my deductions would have been about 15% lower, (unless I employed someone, when I would then also have to pay a 15% tax on my professional assets each year). Yes that’s right; they have different social charges for different professions, and different pension rates and also different employment laws! Mad!

The left is very strong in France. There are actively supported communist and extreme left candidates whose ideas get significant air time and weigh quite heavily on the Socialist Party (PS). The left in France believe fervently in Social Justice and the redistribution of wealth but have very few suggestions to help in the process of creating wealth to then redistribute. In fact the creation of wealth comes very low on their list of priorities. In their philosophy profits should be given first to the workers and then what’s left to the shareholders. Although they cite mondialisation as a reason for all their problems, they don’t really accept that we all live in a world market economy where investment capital will flow towards the best conditions for making a profit. In fact they hardly mention investment at all, except in terms of training and research. Their instinct is to protect what they have, subsidise individuals and reject change.

I will give an example. Everyone in France is afraid of “delocalization”, in other words, closing French factories and relocating to Asia or Eastern Europe. So Segolene’s policy is to adjust the corporate tax system to penalize companies which re-locate. But the PS does not stop to think whether this will affect the decisions of foreign companies concerning where to invest new capital. I believe that this policy would lead to a progressive decline in the competitivity of French companies as a result of under-investment. In 21st century Europe it is not possible to live behind a wall of protectionism and exchange controls, and thus try to prevent businesses from making rational investment decisions. Bizarrely this policy is promoted by both the extreme right and the extreme left.

Another example is the PS’ idea to re-launch growth in the economy by using an increase in the minimum wage (SMIC) to 1,500 euros/month as against 1,254 currently, a 20% increase. This is after it has already risen 18% in the last 5 years, much faster than salaries. They don’t stop to ask where the money will come from in businesses using low paid workers, or concern themselves about whether it would lead to some businesses becoming unprofitable and closing, or others deciding not to even start up. (Somehow it will promote growth in the economy which sounds a bit like printing money to me). An economist has called it “le Smicardisation de l’emploi”!

I can’t decide whether these highly intelligent people, who are better educated than me, really can’t foresee the next logical consequence of their flawed policies, or whether they are perpetrating a conspiracy to fool naïve electors?

The right (Sarkozy UMP) also believes in Social Justice (they are above all French) but their analysis of what is wrong (low investment, low competitivity, low levels of innovation) inclines them towards helping businesses to create wealth and this makes people suspicious because they don’t generally believe that the wealth will come to them but that it will go to the (foreign) shareholders.

In general I am not particularly impressed by Sarkozy, who is struggling to overcome his Rambo act last year when, as interior minister, he started talking zero tolerance on delinquents and cracking down on immigration. He also has the disadvantage of still being part of the existing UMP government which has made the usual mistakes and not delivered very much of consequence.

In my opinion, neither Nicholas Sarkozy nor Segolene Royal, thus far in the campaign, has demonstrated any of the necessary grasp of foreign policy, which is a French President’s direct responsibility. I expect you heard about Royal’s gaffes over Quebec and Corsica, but these are long forgotten now. Who was it who said a week is a long time in politics?

I will be bold and make some predictions. If the right win the Presidency and the Assembly, then after some months they will run into trouble with the unions who, supported by the left, will challenge a key policy, probably to do with limiting union power. France will descend into the streets, and grind to a halt, until the government withdraws to lick its wounds. (French governments always back down against popular opinion; remember the attempt to introduce a new form of employment contract, the CPE). The Prime Minister will be changed and no further serious reform will be attempted. During the rest of their five year term, France will continue to decline relative to its European neighbours.

I have not spoken much about Bayrou, who presents the French with an alternative because he proposes a broad Left-Right coalition, citing Germany as a successful example. He has a problem because his UDF party is traditionally right of centre, but he does have the appeal of avoiding another swing of the pendulum and his coalition approach is his only serious way of distinguishing himself from the other parties. Personally I dislike coalitions, unless they are forced by circumstances they are unlikely to hold together for very long and usually lead to weak governments. To propose it as a policy objective seems to me to be politically naïve. If he wins the Presidency, (which at the moment looks unlikely) then a wishy-washy set of policies will be introduced, which tinker with the margins of the problems, whilst more radical propositions will be discarded, because they will not receive a majority of votes. In this way he will avoid the revolution in the streets but, although it could be amusing to watch the Left - Right juggling act, it would not seriously change anything, and again France will continue to decline relative to its European neighbours.

If the left win they will introduce their very protectionist, business unfriendly, policies without complaint from anybody who matters politically, and quietly foreign investment will dry up and French companies will transfer their assets overseas. At the end of five years unemployment will be higher and disposable incomes lower. Taxes will also be higher, discouraging initiative even further. If they are unlucky there will be a downturn in the world economy which will make things worse. In this scenario the crisis will come from further rioting in the banlieu and to deal with that they will try to create unreal jobs with borrowed money. (Sounds familiar doesn’t it)? It is possible that after this a realization might emerge that change in the other direction is imperative. In a Machiavellian sort of way this could be the best way of achieving the necessary change in France.

So you can see that France like the UK is divided politically and I believe that it will struggle to live up to its political ambitions either right or left. The resulting lower growth will bring more social division and lack of opportunity, and the brightest young people and entrepreneurs will leave France.

The polls are currently showing Royal and Sarkozy level on 28/29% and Bayrou at 17%, with Sarkozy winning narrowly on the second round. Whichever way they vote, France is going to go through worse times in the next five years than it is currently and maybe it’s a good thing that we have a UK based income and don’t live in a city!