The government spokesman made this announcement on Wednesday after the Council of Ministers, believing that it is to be feared on this text “again a blockage, via political postures of the opposition groups “.
Le Monde
Ready to trigger the adoption procedure without a vote – on 49.3 – For the draft budget for 2023 in the National Assembly, the government reserves the right to use it a second time in a few days. “The government, will have to be able to engage, if necessary, its responsibility via 49.3” on the Social Security Budget 2023, argued its spokesperson, Olivier Véran, Wednesday October 19.
“This will be the case on all the budgetary texts of the State and Social Security,” he added at the end of the Council of Ministers, taking care to specify that if the government was to use it, it would “again take into account the contributions to the text of the majority groups and oppositions”.
“It is to be feared, again, a blockage” of oppositions
Olivier Véran had already announced, last week, the fact that the government could take up 49.3 on the Budget 2023 Budget Bill, a project since confirmed by the Prime Minister, Elisabeth Borne. About the social security finance bill (PLFSS), the government spokesperson said:
While the debates in committee were of quality during the examination this time of the draft social security budget, it is to be feared again a blockage, via political postures of the opposition groups in the hemicycle.
At the start of the week, opposition deputies accused the government and majority deputies of “pretending” to debate the 2023 finance bill, “pending 49.3”.
Elisabeth Borne confirmed, Sunday evening on the set of TF1, which the government would use it in the days to come, without specifying what day. A triggering of the article Wednesday in the afternoon was deemed probable by the opposition and political councils of the majority, without this being confirmed at midday by Mr. Véran.
Before the resumption of debates on the 2023 finance bill, planned around 4 p.m., nearly 2,000 amendments remained to be examined, some of which are on sensitive subjects, such as the taxation of “superprofits”, which risk not to have time to be discussed.