Where does France stand after government collapse?
After the French government was toppled in a vote of no confidence, President Emmanuel Macron has rejected calls for his resignation. In an address to the nation, he said he would fulfil his mandate until the end of his term of office in 2027 and appoint a new prime minister to form a 'government of the general interest'. Commentators discuss what should be done to stabilise the country.
Monsieur le président, please don't resign!
Le Point publishes an open letter to Emmanuel Macron by columnist Brice Couturier urging the president to stay in office:
“In the current international situation, with Russia waging a full-fledged war in Ukraine and a hybrid war against all Nato member states in Europe, it would be reassuring to know that you, as the person responsible for our foreign and defence policy, are sitting in the Elysée Palace. That is the first reason why I am urging you not to resign from your post despite the persistent pressure from the LFI leadership to do so. The second is that your legitimacy and that of the members of the National Assembly, which results from specific elections, are separate from each other.”
Time for a technocratic government
In view of the prevailing majority situation, the Neue Zürcher Zeitung considers a non-partisan cabinet to be the best solution:
“A head of government and a cabinet whose members are not party-affiliated or are at least respected beyond party boundaries. What has already been done several times in Italy would be an experiment for France. But right now it seems to be the best solution. After all, the last few months have shown that the dominant parties in the National Assembly are not prepared to come together and reach a compromise in the interests of the country - not even when it comes to something as fundamental as a budget. A technocratic government could provide stability for a while because it represents a consensus, albeit a small one.”
Le Pen is taking a big risk
Dnevnik examines Marine Le Pen's role of in the collapse of the French government:
“Le Pen is said to have decided to bring down Barnier's government because she hopes that the resulting political destabilisation will prompt Macron to resign, paving the way for her to win the early presidential election. In other words, before 31 March, when she could be banned by a court from holding public office for using money intended to pay the salaries of her MEPs' assistants to finance her party in France. However, Le Pen could become the main culprit in the worsening financial and economic crisis, which is being exacerbated by the political crisis and the vote of no confidence against the government.”
The French must revolutionise themselves
Macron's resignation won't solve the crisis, explains Jean-Eric Schoettl, former secretary general of the French Constitutional Council, in Le Figaro:
“We are witnessing the breakdown of the belief system that gave our political life a bipolar structure. This had many repercussions in elections: the impossibility of finding majorities, more votes against than in favour. If the political crisis is coupled with an institutional crisis, it is not because the institutions are failing but because they are struggling to keep up with the multipolarisation of opinion. ... How do we get out of this? Not through institutional tricks such as the resignation of the president, proportional representation or participatory democracy, but through a revolution in each and every one of us: rediscovering a sense of belonging to the nation; placing the general interest above our quarrels.”
Reduce the debt now
De Telegraaf urges France to solve its budget problems:
“The interests of the Eurozone are at stake here. If France becomes the new Greece, the economic catastrophe cannot be overlooked. ... French politics will need time to break the deadlock. But the message from Brussels will have to be consistent. The government has collapsed over the budget, but the country cannot avoid the task of putting its finances in order. ... Our monetary union is only credible if all countries honour the agreements.”