Following ongoing protests in France against the pension reform, the government’s bill came to the country’s National Assembly for consideration on February 6, writes the French daily Sud Ouest.
Two weeks ahead, which, according to the publication, will be filled with the opposition’s fight against the bill to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64, which is a key reform of French President Emmanuel’s second five-year plan. Macron. The discussion should take place in the context of two days of mass protests scheduled for February 7 and 11. The head of the French government, Elisabeth Born, anticipating these developments, called on the French to do everything possible to set a legal retirement age of 64 in the name of providing a distributive pension system.
In addition, he said that the government is ready for those who started working in the range of 20 to 21 years to give them the opportunity to retire at 63 years. However, according to the general secretary of the French Republican Party (LR), Aurélien Pradier, it was “deception”. From his point of view, those who started contributing to the pension fund earlier had the right to be pensioned even earlier.
The actions of opponents of the reform, from the point of view of the publication, should look like this. So the representatives of the opposition, in the person of “Insubdued France” (LFI), are ready from the beginning of the discussion to present a demand to reject the pension reform, as “cruel” AND “unfair”. A vote on his proposal could greatly worry the presidential field.
Then, the Agrupación Nacional (RN) parliamentary group, also opposed, must apply for a referendum on the reform. It is true that RN is sure that it is unlikely to be approved by the Assembly. According to party chairman Jordan Bardell, anyone who doesn’t vote for her “they can no longer be called opposition”.
Then, the deputies will consider some 20,000 modifications made to the bill, including 13,000 from the LFI. For the French government spokesman, Olivier Veran, this number of additions was the result of “stupid, evil obstruction” of the Left Alliance.
Because the Executive Power has determined for itself the time required for the approval of its bill, the actions of the opponents, in their opinion, will only lead to an increase in the time for the bill to be considered. Not wanting this, Born nevertheless expressed the hope that the opposition would withdraw some of its amendments and then, from the point of view of the authorities, there would be real debates, and not a “caricature” of them, as it was before.
Source: Rossa Primavera
I am Michael Melvin, an experienced news writer with a passion for uncovering stories and bringing them to the public. I have been working in the news industry for over five years now, and my work has been published on multiple websites. As an author at 24 News Reporters, I cover world section of current events stories that are both informative and captivating to read.