Former French Prime
Minister Michel Rocard once quipped that “pension reform has the potential to bring
down several governments” (avec la
réforme des retraites, il y a de quoi faire sauter plusieurs gouvernements). On Thursday of this week, France will suffer once
again what promises to be a more or less total shutdown of public transport in
the Paris area, a very limited number of mainline trains in the rest of the
country and union sponsored street marches, probably accompanied by masked and
helmeted hooligans hiding behind them. Many people who remember the three week
long public transport strikes of 1995 are openly wondering whether the current President
and his government will suffer the same fate as President Jacques Chirac and Prime
Minister Alain Juppé, who were eventually forced to retreat ignominiously and withdraw
the pension reform that they had proposed. In 2019,
Emmanuel Macron’s chances of bringing his five-year term to a successful close
by introducing a reform that has been fiercely resisted every time it has been attempted,
hinge on the outcome of this show of force. Be that as it may, it is such
repeated failures to bring about fundamental structural reform that have earned
France a reputation among foreigners for being ungovernable.
The terms
of the current conflict are deceptively simple. Back in 2016, when Emmanuel Macron
announced that he was standing for President in 2017, he declared that one of
his main policy ambitions was to reform the French pension system, turning it
into a “universal scheme” in which every contribution would give rise to the
same pension entitlement, regardless of whether one worked in the private or public
sector or was self-employed. The simple message was that “1 euro of contribution
would give the same entitlement to every pensioner”. Nothing was said at the
time about raising the retirement age or increasing contributions or the dire
and converging forecasts about future deficits, but it is worth noting that the
French pension system as a whole absorbs more than 14% of GDP, quite a lot more
than in other comparable countries. Much of it comes out of the state budget.
In contrast
to the proposed reforms put forward by Alain Juppé’s government in 1995, for
which there was hardly any prior consultation with those most directly
concerned, there is no doubt that this time the government has fallen over
itself to consult as many parties as possible and public debate has been
vigorous and encouraged. However, as these consultations have proceeded, under
the guidance of the avuncular Pensions Minister, Jean-Paul Delevoye, what
looked like a simple solution has turned out to be a lot more complicated and the
attempt to merge 42 individual pension schemes into one has hit many obstacles.
For a start, to whom should the reformed system apply? To those who are 5, 10 or
15 years from retirement? Or only to those entering the workforce after the
reform is adopted, a situation that would be tantamount to no reform at all for
the next 40 years or so? What about the pension schemes that have managed
themselves quite happily for many years, whose demographic characteristics are
favourable and who are likely, under the proposed reform, to lose control over
the reserves thy have built up? Is it fair that metro and bus drivers in Paris
should be able to retire almost ten years earlier than their colleagues in other
large French cities? Is it true that their working conditions are so much worse
than those of nurses and doctors, whose jobs can be considered just as demanding
and essential for society but who have no particular pension privileges? And on
top of the proposals for a systemic reform, other more short-term but constantly
recurring questions have also been raised: should the retirement age be raised
for all, contributions increased, or existing pension entitlements reduced? In the face of the number and complexity of such
issues and the very different possible outcomes, the government had been criticised
for not making its intentions clear, and by the more suspicious in nature (a large
majority of French citizens!) for having a hidden agenda! But when all is
said and done, the point has now been reached at which it is clear that the crux
of the current reform effort is the reshaping of pensions in the public sector
and particularly in big public transport companies like the SNCF and the Paris
based RATP. And once again, the majority of unions in these and other public
sectors have made it clear that they are prepared to bring the country to a
standstill to stop the reform. Listening to a union representative on the radio
this morning describing what he characterised as appalling working conditions in
the Paris metro, I was left wondering why he and so many of his colleagues had not
already left their jobs to look for something more congenial. But rightly or wrongly,
their determination seems as strong as ever. In this respect at least, nothing
has changed since 1995.
And in this
conflict, as in so many others between the government and the unions, it is the
evolving state of public opinion that will ultimately determine the outcome. For
the moment, the attitudes of men and women in the street are inconsistent and
contradictory. Some polls indicate that a majority is in favour of a straightforward,
one-size-fits-all pension system, but other polls have found that many also have
sympathy with those who are presented as, or loudly proclaim themselves as, losers
in the process of simplification. Now
that the strike has been called and is likely to be massively observed, any
objective assessment of the “facts”, difficult at the best of times, will take
second place to a battle of soundbites and images against the background of all
too familiar scenes of demonstrations and paralysis. In 1995, one of the reasons
the strikers won the day was that Chirac was perceived, correctly as it turned out,
as a half-hearted reformer. Macron is of a very different mettle. It is too early
to tell whether Michel Rocard’s prediction will once again turn out to be true or
whether Emmanuel Macron is the President who will at last break the curse of fundamental
structural reform in France and succeed where many others have failed.
No comments:
Post a Comment