The Libertades, Independientes, Overseas and Territories (LIOT) group’s demand garnered the support of 278 MPs in the chamber, out of the 287 needed for an outright majority and the ouster of Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne and her cabinet.
The left bloc, made up of insubmissives, socialists, communists and ecologists, and the extreme right (Agrupación Nacional), as expected, accompanied the initiative, as did part of the conservatives from Los Republicanos, a party that had fate in the hands of the government.
The motion of censure tabled by the far right in the assembly, which has much less chance of succeeding, has yet to be voted on.
The opposition opposes the reform and its extension of the statutory retirement age from 62 to 64, and the ruling party’s way of doing this, invoking Article 49.3 of the Constitution and avoiding the vote in the National Assembly, where it says no more the absolute majority.
Only once since the beginning of the Fifth Republic in 1958, in 1962 under the leadership of General Charles de Gaulle, has a motion of this kind succeeded in his attempt to overthrow the government.
Presenting the appeal on behalf of the LIOT, centrist MP Charles de Courson accused the executive of using force and avoiding parliamentary debate with the use of 49.3 and insisted that the retirement project had not been successful.
Likewise, he confirmed that the government has been made aware of the consequences of invoking the controversial article, the activation of which sparked new protests with episodes of violence on Thursday, particularly in this capital.
Other opposition MPs such as Laure Lavalette (National Group) and Mathilde Panot (La Francia Insumisa) criticized both the reform and the funds used to adopt it.
During the debate ahead of the vote, Aurore Bergé, a parliamentarian from the ruling Renaissance party, appreciated that the motions are aimed at paralyzing the country and blocking its roads.
For her part, Prime Minister Borne defended the use of Article 49.3, stating that “it was not a dictator’s invention” and claimed that the government encouraged consultation on pension reform, which was also attacked by the opposition and unions in order to extend the contribution period and abolish special retirement arrangements.
ro/wmr