The sudden
resignation of Nicholas Hulot, from his post as Ministre de la Transition Ecologique et Solidaire (Minister for Ecological
and Soldarity-driven Transition) may have come as surprise by the manner and
timing of his departure, but it is surely less of a surprise to those who have become
used to the regular reports of misgivings about his role in government and his seeming
inability to make a meaningful impact on France’s environmental and energy
policies.
Nicholas
Hulot, now 63, was, the pollsters tell us, the government’s most popular
minister, well-known in France for many years as an environmental activist. He
rose to fame through a series of TV programmes that he made and introduced,
designed to illustrate the impact of our growth driven economic model on the
natural environment and its responsibility in climate change. He set up a foundation
to promote environmental responsibility but also, with the help of the large
French company, L’Oréal, launched and
sponsored a range of beauty products bearing the name of his TV show “Ushuaia”, from which he continues to
make a comfortable living. Politically, he was courted by no less than three
French presidents, Jacques Chirac, Nicholas Sarkozy and François Hollande, keen
to enlist this popular public figure in an attempt to burnish their own green
credentials. Although Hulot was happy to serve as an unofficial advisor, he did
not, until persuaded to do so by Emmanuel Macron, accept a ministerial position,
considering that he was more useful trying to influence the policies he
advocates from outside government. Paradoxically, his 15-month stint as minister
of Edouard Philippe’s government has proved that he was right. Temperamentally ill-suited
to the cut and thrust of everyday politics, profoundly unhappy with opposition
from both within the government, notably from the Minister of Agriculture, and
outside it from lobbies of all sorts, he swallowed hard as many government decisions
went against him – on the use of pesticides in agriculture, the reduction of
France’s considerable nuclear capacity, the watering down of his attempts to
promote animal welfare and many others. The presence of a well-known lobbyist
at a meeting convened by the President with representatives of the hunting community
seems to have been the last straw. The following morning, he announced on a
radio programme, to the astonishment of even his interviewers, that, “unwilling to lie to myself any further”,
he was leaving the government, without so much as notifying the President or
the Prime Minister beforehand.
If this
were just another case of strongly held views clashing with the inevitable
compromises required by cabinet government, the story would be only one more example
of many a civil society figure who has come to grief as a politician. As former
socialist grandee, Jean-Pierre Chevènement, once pithily observed, “a minister
either resigns or keeps his trap shut” (“Un
ministre ça démissionne ou ça ferme sa gueule”). I fear however that this particular
resignation is more significant, as it touches on the heart of the project that
Emmanuel Macron has sought to promote, the main reason why this relatively unknown
figure emerged from the shadows to set up his own party and conquer both the
presidency and a whopping parliamentary majority in little more than a year. And
also finally persuaded Nicholas Hulot to accept a formal political mandate.
Macron clearly
sees himself as a man with a mission to profoundly transform France, harbouring
a clear vision about what he wants to achieve and an unshakable belief in his
ability to bring about the changes that the country has shirked so often in the
past: freeing businesses from the shackles imposed by an often overbearing
administration in order to create more jobs, make work pay and reduce unemployment,
thereby reducing public spending and making France, particularly its public
sector, leaner and more efficient.
There are
many who share Macron’s view that France must accept radical change to achieve
these goals, and they see him as the agent of that change. The resignation of Nicholas
Hulot is an important signal that things are not going according to plan. A transition towards a greener and less energy
intensive economic model is clearly being resisted by deeply entrenched interests
that have most to lose from it: the powerful nuclear lobby, afraid of France
losing its technological expertise, a strong farming lobby, still wedded to its
pesticide and energy fuelled quest for ever greater yields, to name just two. There
are other signals too: the preparation of next year’s budget is constrained by
an unexpected dip in growth, a rising deficit and fears in high places about
the psychological impact of the pay-as-you-go income tax scheme, due to be
introduced in January. On the basis of
what we know so far, the draft budget to be debated in parliament this autumn sounds
decidedly unradical, based on little more than the time honoured methods of
reducing the number of civil servants, cutting social benefits and surreptitiously
increasing taxes.
In a word, after
what looked like a promising start, the profound transformation that was Macron’s
pledge to the French people seems to be running into the sand. The government
and its supporters point to the policies of encouraging investment, making the labour
market more flexible, promoting the training and retraining of workers and
employees and plead patience. Such measures will of course take time to produce
results, but there nevertheless seems to be little trace of a root-and-branch restructuring
of central and local government that other countries like Canada, Sweden, or
the UK have introduced in the past decades. On top of that, where is the
evidence of a new paradigm reconciling economic growth with less pressure on natural
resources and more renewable energies? At a time when Germany is implementing a
radical decision to close all its nuclear power plants by 2022, there were
reports yesterday that some experts in France recommend building no less than
six new EPR reactors starting in 2025. After a series of official meetings
earlier this year on food production and retailing, it is clear that the French
are increasingly keen on organic produce and recycling, but supermarkets still
vie with each other to sell processed foods laced with additives and fruit and
vegetables raised on chemical fertilisers and pesticides at the lowest possible
prices.
As Macron
makes a start on a decisive year for his presidency, these questions remain
unanswered. The outcome of the budget
debate, the name of the next minister of the environment or perhaps a fresh
political initiative will either confirm that profound transformation is still
on the agenda or, on the contrary, that France is back to business as usual.