The use of article 49.3 of the French Constitution by Prime Minister Élisabeth Borne to adopt the 2024 budget without a vote has sparked new controversy. This decision, which marks the 16th use of the article since Borne’s arrival at Matignon, was strongly criticized by the opposition and led to a motion of censure being filed.
Article 49.3 allows the government to adopt a bill without a vote by incurring its responsibility. It is often used when the government believes that it does not have enough parliamentary support to pass a text by vote.
In the present case, Élisabeth Borne justified her use of 49.3 by the need not to deprive France of a budget. According to her, there is no alternative majority capable of agreeing on the subject. This decision was greeted with boos in the National Assembly and led the deputies of La France insoumise to table a motion of censure.
The motion of censure denounces an “austerity cure” of the budget and also denounces the “authoritarian slope” taken by the government with the repetitions of the use of article 49.3. However, the motion of censure has little chance of being adopted given that it does not enjoy the support of the right.
Élisabeth Borne regretted the slow pace of the budget review, which could have been distorted by additional spending. Furthermore, no opposition group seems ready to move away from its principled position of rejecting the budget, regardless of its contents.
This new use of section 49.3 has generated mixed reactions. On the one hand, some believe that this is an attack on democracy and that the use of this controversial constitutional tool has become too frequent. On the other hand, some argue that this helps avoid parliamentary blockages and maintain the process of adopting laws.
In conclusion, the use of article 49.3 of the Constitution by Élisabeth Borne to adopt the 2024 budget sparked criticism and a motion of censure. This decision raises questions about democracy and the frequent use of this constitutional tool. It remains to be seen what the political consequences of this decision will be on the government in place.