November 22, 2024 - 7:00am
If Rachel Reeves thinks she’s getting a rough ride at the moment, she should spare a thought for the French Prime Minister, Michel Barnier. It’s his responsibility to get the 2025 budget through the French parliament, and if he fails it could be much more than his job on the line.
France has got major money problems. While the British state spends 43% of UK GDP, the equivalent French figure is 58%. Even worse, the difference between what the French government spent last year and what it raised reached 5.5% of GDP. This year the deficit will be 6.1%. That’s simply unsustainable — not least because the European Union requires member states to keep their deficits below 3% of GDP.
Hence the importance of the budget. If it doesn’t pass, then the country’s financial embarrassment could turn into a full-blown debt crisis — of which we’ve already seen warning signs. Furthermore, if the second largest economy in the European Union stops playing ball, then the EU’s fiscal rules will lose credibility, with knock-on effects for the single currency.
Therefore the budget must pass — even if, as seems likely, a majority of deputies in the French National Assembly are against it. As luck would have it, there’s a clause in the French constitution that allows the Prime Minister to force it through anyway. It’s a bit of a nuclear option, but Michel Barnier has indicated he’s willing to use it.
The catch is that the National Assembly has a nuclear option of its own. It can pass a motion of censure that would force Barnier to resign, bringing down the entire government. That, in turn, might cause President Macron to resign, with destabilising consequences for both France and the EU.
The Left-wing parties are ready to press the red button, but they won’t have the numbers unless Marine Le Pen and her National Rally (RN) party join in. Remember, it was her who essentially chose Barnier as Prime Minister — and it is her who could send him packing.
Ominously, the latest polling shows that over 60% of RN voters want him censured. So the last thing the French establishment ought to do right now is antagonise Le Pen unnecessarily. And yet that’s exactly what they are doing. In a move that her supporters see as reminiscent of the “lawfare” directed at Donald Trump, Marine Le Pen has been accused of misusing EU funds. As well as fines and a possible prison sentence, prosecutors are pushing for a five-year ban on her standing for political office. This would stop her running for the presidency in 2027, which Le Pen describes as a sentence of “political death“.
This would certainly suit the establishment parties, but given the make-or-break budget, the timing is dangerous. Those out to get Le Pen should remember what happened to Samson in the Bible. Cornered and out of options, the Old Testament hero used the last of his strength to topple the pillars of a temple. The entire edifice came tumbling down, crushing his foes. It might be an idea not to put Le Pen in the same position.
Peter Franklin is Associate Editor of UnHerd. He was previously a policy advisor and speechwriter on environmental and social issues.
peterfranklin_
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeTime to replenish the popcorn supplies
“Remember, it was her who essentially chose Barnier as Prime Minister – and it is her who could send him packing.”
Hm. Written by one of the UnHerd team. How do you get a job with UnHerd? Even if you argue about the syntax, you could still rewrite without a problem. How about, ‘Remember, she essentially chose Barnier as Prime Minister and she could send him packing’.
No thanks. Job application rejected.
How about some insightful thoughts on the content …..
Couldn’t read past that. The sign of an amateur trying to write like a professional, but failing at the first hurdle.
Poor Caradog! The poor Welsh, of whom I fear you are all too true a pontificating charicature! And, the worst is, one feels so uncharitable and ashamed pointing this out! Alas! Poor Wales! A few bouncy castles and a toy parliament are sufficient to keep today’s Welsh in check.
Sounds like you’re not as comfortable as you pretend to be. If you live in the SE of England you are probably doing well – perhaps one of the million civil servants ‘working’ from home. Anywhere else in England is about the same as Wales.
No, I remember from a couple of days ago. The NHS. A job for life with a good pension.
.
CW raises a fair point. Surely the minimum qualification for a journalist is to be able to write coherently in his own language. Or was he a diversity hire?
Seriously.
I just made the same point. It’s infuriating. And I don’t even have a single degree credential.
I doubt if you need a degree. You just need to be able to read and write. It is modern and trendy NOT to be able to read and write. But I am not modern.
I’ve been saying it for some time – vive la 6eme republique. France could be the first domino to fall in the SDC as fiat borrowing overwhelms her, but that will give way to a new system. The fact that we are in a 4th turning is increasingly apparent. As tough as that is, a new fiscal/political settlement will be painful, but I continue to focus on whether we can avoid large-scale war and particularly what system might win on the other side. Difficulties are relative.
If the second largest economy in the European Union stops playing ball with the EU’s fiscal rules? If? Since the launch of the Euro, France has only complied with the 3% limit in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2006, 2007, 2018, and 2019. That’s 18 years out of 25 when it hasn’t complied and not faced any sanctions whatsoever. The fiscal rules clearly do not apply to France.
The current budget presented by Barnier doesn’t make the budget compliant with Euro rules this year. Or next year. Or the year after that. Or the year after that. The Barnier budget projects to cut the deficit to 3% in 2029. Economic forecasting being no better than reading tea leaves, a plan to reduce the deficit to “only” 3% five years from now is no plan at all. And a 3% deficit is still a huge deficit when the debt pile is already 112% of GDP and rising.
Barnier’s budget doesn’t save France from financial oblivion. Barnier and the politics he represents are the cause, not the cure. Managerialism may turn out to be the most dangerous 13 letter word in history.
And before UK citizens get a case of schadenfreunde, the UK deficit is over 4% and debt to GDP is just below 100% only after some heroic revisions by the ONS. We are only a few years behind the French curve.
US not exactly in great shape either.
If managerialism is the most dangerous word in history then ‘central bank groupthink’ might well be the most dangerous phrase.
Big difference being that the USA is the worlds biggest and still most entreprenurial economy with the worlds reserve currency.It is energy self sufficient and under the Donald will be a major energy exporter and even under the economically illiterate sleepy joe managed to achieve real growth rates that would make Barnier & Scultz weep if they could achieve them/The USA is a supertanker and when it turns the ramifications are huge.
And the net worth of US households is $160 trillion vs $40 trillion in debt. Growth and a bit higher taxes will keep the debt situation sustainable. Tech leadership, energy leadership and the deepest financial markets will also play a role
That net worth can easily vaporize in the coming debt crisis when the US national debt approaches 50 trillion, Trump tax cuts and tariffs increases inflation again, interest rates rise as a consequence, and the resulting recession tanks the stock markets and housing markets. And if Trump slashes government spending as they intend to, recession will be just around the corner. As far as energy is concerned, oil companies will only increase oil and gas production when prices suite them and it’s profitable, they have no intention or interest in flooding the markets with cheap oil, it’s a fantasy, not reality. Global oil demand growth is tepid at best, and opec has plenty of supply capacity.
Yeah growth and productivity in the US much better, I was just referring to the debt and deficit situation
Besides countries like France never complying to the fiscal rules, I’m also wondering how seriously we are supposed to take those rules. Has there ever been a Western- or advanced economy that actually got into seriously trouble because of their national debt? Post-WW II, I mean. According to fiscally conservatives, insolvency is always around the corner and countries like Japan and, in fact, the US should have been doomed many times over, but it never really happens. Greece got into trouble because the EU demanded austerity and now they are supposedly doing better, even though their debt never improved. If you look into it, it seems austerity rarely actually works. Private debt usually has an inverse relationship with public spending, which seems more dangerous. Once the recession becomes too serious governments usually start spending and printing money like never before and only then the economy recovers. And so we could wonder how seriously policymakers are taking this 60%/3% rule as a fiscal measure in the first place.
Sounds like Canada, every year the government says they will balance the budget in 5 years, yet the deficits keep rising, it’s all bs. Lies and more lies, the entire edifice of western country finances rests on increasing debts, it’s like a phony economy hooked on heroine .
I appreciate that you provided the numbers.
Can you imagine France imposing on itself the austerity it imposed on Greece in 2015?
The solution is obvious: even more Europe.
Translated into something meaningful it’s, ‘Give Brussels even more powers, and French MPs will be able to blame it on the EU and, most importantly, keep their jobs’.
“The Left-wing parties are ready to press the red button, but they won’t have the numbers unless Marine Le Pen and her National Rally (RN) party join in. Remember, it was [her] who essentially chose Barnier as Prime Minister — and it is [her] who could send him packing.”
It was SHE not HER. FFS get an editor.
The thing that strikes me about this situation is just how eager the elites are to engage in law-fare to try and stop their opponents when all political and other legitimate means fail. Just witness how quickly our own, dear, PM was to empty prisons and jails of burglars, rapists and violent thugs to make space for people who posted things on Facebook that he didn’t like.
… It was she (not her) who chose Barnier as PM …