pension reform repealed? A thorny process

The Liot bill aimed at repealing the pension reform was deemed financially admissible, despite the opinion of the majority. But the presidential camp has other means to try to prevent the text from being voted on.

Éric Coquerel’s green light! This Tuesday, May 30, 2023, the deputy La France insoumise (LFI) gave his approval, as chairman of the Finance Committee at the National Assembly, for the examination of the bill on the repeal of the reform . Éric Coquerel thus rejected at the same time the argument of its unconstitutionality put forward by the presidential camp. This announcement comes as this Wednesday, May 31, this bill from the Liot group, which aims to set the legal retirement age from 64 to 62, must be examined by the Social Affairs Committee, before the the group’s parliamentary niche on 8 June.

But if this announcement by Éric Coquerel is a first snub for the majority, the road is still long and full of pitfalls for the opposition. Before it can be examined in Parliament, the Liot proposal must therefore be studied by the Social Affairs Committee on Wednesday. However, it is chaired by Fadila Khattabi (Renaissance). Which risks modifying the bill by deleting article 1, the one that contains the very essence of the text. The majority also still holds certain cards in hand to try to prevent the examination of the proposal in Parliament, therefore its vote and with the repeal of the pension reform.

The Liot bill admissible under article 40 of the Constitution

Determined to implement the pension reform, the presidential majority organized the counter-attack against the Liot bill. The first strategy consisted in opposing article 40 of the Constitution to the text and betting on its financial inadmissibility. The article provides that “proposals and amendments formulated by members of Parliament are not admissible when their adoption would result in either a reduction in public resources, or the creation or aggravation of a public charge”. And, according to the majority made up of the Renaissance, MoDem and Horizons groups, the Liot bill creates charges for public finances equal to “15 billion euros” according to Aurore Bergé, president of the Renaissance group, and evaluated at 18 billion by Yaël Braun-Pivet, President of the Assembly.

However, recourse to article 40 of the Constitution did not have the expected result since the chairman of the finance committee, the deputy LFI Erci Coquerel, deemed admissible the Liot bill against the opinion of the majority which , according to him, is looking for “a way to avoid the vote”. A decision much criticized by the President of the Assembly who denounced the too flexible reading of Article 40 for her elected colleague.

A majority amendment to counter the Liot bill?

Despite the failure of the use of Article 40 of the Constitution, the majority has imagined other solutions to try to thwart the Liot bill and the attempt to repeal the pension reform. Deemed admissible, the text must pass into the hands of the Social Affairs Committee, which can either adopt it as it is, or modify it and in particular delete article 1, which provides for the repeal of the reform.

The commission being chaired by Fadila Khattabi (Renaissance), it is likely that a modification of the text will be decided, in this case the Liot group could have to reintroduce its article via an amendment, which could never be accepted because judged financially inadmissible by the President of the National Assembly. Yaël Braun-Pivet also assured “to take [ses] responsibilities” if necessary when the time comes. The majority can also provide for the tabling of an amendment on the deletion of Article 1 during the debates in Parliament rather than a modification in the Committee on Social Affairs. The effects and consequences would be the following: same.

Can the Liot bill be passed?

All laws can be repealed by other laws, the proposal of the Liot group of deputies can therefore, in theory, come back to the pension reform and the postponement of the retirement age to 64 years. In practice, too, the text can succeed, but this success is much less obvious. To be adopted by the National Assembly, the bill must receive a relative majority within the hemicycle. An ambitious goal, but achievable since during the vote of the motion of censure against the pension reform – also tabled by the Liot group – only nine votes were missing to obtain an absolute majority.

The Liot bill is already assured of the vote of the 21 deputies of the centrist group and the support of the elected representatives of Nupes in addition to those of the National Rally, i.e. 261 votes. She should also be able to count on the votes of 19 deputies from the Republicans who had supported the motion of censure. But we would have to convince more elected LRs to vote for the text to obtain the majority of votes, because if the 43 other right-wing deputies line up behind the majority, the latter would be 294 votes strong.

The Liot bill voted in the Senate?

If, despite the opposition of the majority, the Liot bill seeking to repeal the pension reform is adopted by the National Assembly, another step will still have to be taken: the adoption of the text by the Senate. With a majority right in the upper house, the repeal of the pension reform has very little chance of succeeding. Republican senators had applauded the decision to raise the retirement age to 64 after years of pushing for such a measure. However, in the event of a disagreement between the two chambers, the Assembly has the last word.

What does the Liot law provide for pension reform?

The Liot group has never hidden its intentions: it wishes to repeal the pension reform and this is the goal pursued by the bill which will be examined in the Assembly on June 8, during the parliamentary niche of the centrist group. Article 1 of the text has this sole objective, but it is accompanied by an article 2 which provides for financial measures to compensate for the cost entailed by the repeal of the reform. It is in particular the “increase in excise duty on tobacco” which would make it possible to amortize the burden for social security bodies. Eric Coquerel, as a supporter of the bill and as chairman of the finance committee, also insists on the “pension system financing conference” which is provided for by the text between now and December 31 with the social partners.