«Luckily taunts don’t kill, otherwise we would have 577 deaths to mourn»:. Harold Huwart, a representative of the now small radical left party, remained alone that evening. It’s the only one, in National Assemblyto vote on the first section (“Revenue”) of the State Budget (which does not include measures for Social Security or Good, welfare): 404 voted no, 84 abstained (the majority supported Macron and MoDem led by former prime minister François Bayrou). The calls of Huwart, who now sits in Liot’s centrist group, often close to Macronian positions, fell on deaf ears. However powerful it is in France, the reference stupid failed to overcome the objections of each party. It is true, every article, every amendment to the 2026 budget was voted on by the Assembly, but with varying, capricious, even unthinkable majorities: the economic cultures of the radical left and the right sometimes overlapped and resulted in a joint vote, the tax on unproductive assets was approved by the Lepenists, the socialists and the Ministry of Democracy of the former prime minister François Bayrou. As widely expected, the text was unanimously rejected.
Unacceptable mess
The results are not acceptable to everyone. A mess for the Government: it contains “a number of measures that are unconstitutional, unrealistic or impracticable”, said Public Action and Accounts Minister Amélie de Montchalin, who also remains confident in approving the budget, despite the “cynical attitude” of both the right and the left. Beyond political disputes, the Assembly, accustomed to a political system increasingly centered on the figure of the president (albeit with important countervailing weight), has neither a culture of compromise with other countries nor the working culture of the Swiss parliament (where the Federal Council, always in coalition, presents the budget but intervenes little in discussions and the Constitutional obligation for structural balance in the long term prevails). Therefore, Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu’s strategic choice to make the Lower House accountable to the electorate led to paradoxical results, to the point that the Socialist Party began to regret the much-criticized article 49.3 of the Constitution. The law authorized the Government, upon a vote of no confidence, to approve two state budgets (the other relating to Sécu, the welfare state) without a vote in parliament. However, Lecornu solemnly promised not to do that.
Passed to the Senate
The rethinking of the Socialist Parties is also the result of the situation that has arisen in the Sénat, where the course of the State Budget will soon be resumed, but starting from scratch, based on the original text of the Government: «The longest debate on the budget of the Fifth Republic», says Amélie de Montchalin, turned out to be «a futile exercise». The Upper House is very different from the Assembly, it is an expression of deep France, elected by local authorities: radical right and left groups are almost non-existent (three Lepenis, no iNo), the party with a relative majority is Les Républicains. Here another budget, namely the Sécu budget, which was under scrutiny for several days after the failure of a vote on constitutional provisions in the Assembly, was immediately exposed: the suspension of the pension reform, favored by the left (but also by the radical right) and a central point of agreement between parts of God damn it and the Government, immediately rejected it. An appeal to 49.3 could have untied the knot, but the parties were destroyed – as happens in politics – by their own rhetoric.
The constitution is sometimes too rigid
The real problem for all of France, however, is not the individual measures, which are unlikely to result in majority approval. This is it. There are two financial institutions, each of which is fundamental to the life of the country. Many deadlines are strictly defined by the Constitution, to the point that the president of the Assembly, Yaël Braun-Pivet, requested that this budget be “the last to be discussed in this way”: the House is too fragmented, and will remain so for a long time. The Senate will begin examining the state budget on Thursday but has stated that it cannot reach a final vote before December 15. At this point, when faced with an inevitable deadlock, the Constitution permitted the creation of a mixed commission of equals between deputies and senators who agreed on a text to be voted on by the Assembly alone. On December 23rd. The Sécu budget is a bit more advanced: a joint joint commission could be formed by the end of the month, and a unified text – in the hypothesis that an agreement has been reached – must be voted on by the Assembly. However, the Constitution does not allow it to go beyond December 12th.
Possible alternative
Time was also tight for the extraordinary procedure: the political crisis meant work started late. The government only has until December 19 to choose the possible options very special which allows temporary implementation based on the 2025 budget, and gives deputies and senators more time to resolve the problems that have occurred. This may be the only viable option: Prime Minister Lecornu has ruled it out, but some ministers are starting to talk about it. Also because the alternative is politically even “worse” – for the Government, which excludes it, and also for the opposition – than the approval of the budget without a vote provided for in article 49.3, which states that any motion of no confidence would obstruct the law. The Constitution, apparently designed to avoid deadlock, abstractly allows the Executive to proceed weaponryIn essence, decisions have legal force. The government can release its initial text, with some amendments of its choice. The decision will still depend on voting sensorsas usual, but weaponry will still apply.
