French parliament delivers on Sarkozy's promise

It's never easy following through on an electoral pledge, and if any politician knows how difficult it is, then it must be the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy.

So far he has failed miserably on last year's major presidential campaign promise to increase the purchasing power of the average man and woman on the street here in France and kick-start the sluggish economy he inherited.

But Hallelujah on Monday a minor miracle happened, when his plans to overhaul the French constitution - another key electoral promise - received the parliamentary seal of approval from the country's elected representatives.

Now this is far from being the stuff to whet the appetite of most readers, but bear with it for a moment because there's plenty of substance in what happened in the run up to the vote, and the far-reaching consequences for French politics.

Sarkozy's "victory" was not one easily gained. There had been weeks of arguing, back-room negotiations and comprises as the reform package passed separately through both chambers of parliament, the National Assembly and the Senate.

But for any constitutional changes to be made in France, both had to meet in a joint session in the sumptuous setting of the chateau of Versailles, and a three-fifths majority of votes cast were required for the reforms to be endorsed.

Right up until the last moment the vote was too close to call. The opposition Socialist party had promised to vote "no" and there were even some members of the governing centre-right Union pour un Mouvement Populaire (Union for a Popular Movement, UMP) who were less than happy with the proposed reforms.

In the end though, the bill got the backing of 539 parliamentarians - just one more than the three-fifths necessary - with only one high profile Socialist, Jack Lang, breaking ranks and voting in favour.

Lang's "defection" was perhaps not too much of a surprise as he had served as vice president on the commission charged with proposing many of the reforms. But his decision is likely to have made him even more persona non grata among the Socialist party faithful than he already is.

So what of those reforms - said to amount to the biggest shake-up of the Fifth Republic's constitution since it was first introduced by Charles de Gaulle back in 1958?

Well they include changes to make the president more accountable to a parliament. It'll be able to veto some presidential appointments and the government will be forced to seek parliamentary approval for a military operation (abroad) lasting longer than six months.

The number of terms a president can serve will be limited to two (periods of five years) and the process of allowing national votes or referenda on issues will also be possible if the requisite number of signatures are collected and it has political backing.

So in a very real sense the changes can be, and have been interpreted by many, as at the very least boosting the powers of parliament. Indeed a weekend opinion poll before the crucial vote showed that almost 70 per cent of the French questioned supported the changes.

But while many - and in particular Sarkozy himself of course - are claiming the vote to reflect a "victory for French democracy", critics and in particular the Socialist party claim that the reforms will further weaken the role of the prime minister - already appointed and dismissed at the head of state's discretion.

They fear in particular that the most controversial of the reforms included in the package - allowing the president to make an annual state address directly to parliament along the lines of the US president's state of the nation speech.- will blur the boundaries between the executive and legislative arms of government.

The separation of powers has been an essential part of French politics since 1873 and the president has been banned from appearing in person before the National Assembly or the Senate.

Opponents, and in particular the Socialist party, also claim that the reforms will help create a de facto "monocracy" in which the system of government will be reduced to virtually just one person - the president.

But the stance of the Socialist party itself hasn't been without its own critics even among parts of the media that would ordinarily give the party its backing.

The left-of-centre national daily Libération accused the party of opposing the reforms simply because they didn't go as far as it had perhaps wanted, and the paper warned ominously that the defeat and the "defection" of one of its most prominent members (Lang) would ultimately only bring a smile to the face of one man - Sarkozy.

So with one election promise upheld, Sarkozy will now undoubtedly turn his attention to yet another constitutional battle - that of trying to sort out how the European Union should deal with the Irish rejection of the Lisbon treaty in June.

And the political irony certainly didn't escape the attention of the French press as Sarkozy received news of his domestic victory during a visit to Dublin to discuss the future of that very treaty.

Sarkozy set for a constitutional showdown

Hardly the sexiest headline by any stretch of the imagination. But there again when it comes to institutional reform and changes to the constitution, the subject matter is hardly guaranteed to instill much enthusiasm.

The French president, Nicolas Sarkozy is fighting constitutional reform on two fronts. There is of course the debate over how to deal with the Irish "no" vote in June to the Lisbon treaty. He'll be tackling further that issue on July 21 when he pitches up in Dublin in his role as the EU big cheese while France holds the 27-nation bloc's six-month rotating presidency.

And this week will see his attempts to update the French constitution receive either final parliamentary approval or a political slap in the face.

The vote is too close to call with some likely splits in the governing Union pour un Mouvement Populaire (Union for a Popular Movement, UMP) party and the opposition Socialist party promising to reject the changes.

The reforms themselves have already been passed separately by both chambers of parliament, the National Assembly and the Senate. But for constitutional changes to be made, both have to meet jointly and vote together at a special session opening in Versailles on Monday. A three-fifths majority of votes cast will be needed for the reforms to be endorsed.

At stake basically is one of Sarkozy's electoral promises to change the way politics works here in France.

Among the proposals are moves to make the president more accountable to parliament, allowing him (or her) to appear directly before both chambers. Another clause would require the government to seek parliamentary approval for a military operation (abroad) longer than six months. The number of terms a president could serve would also be limited to two (periods of five years) and the process of allowing national votes or referenda on issues would also be possible if the requisite number of signatures were collected and had political backing.

So in a very real sense the changes could be interpreted as at the very least boosting the powers of parliament.

So what exactly are the fears of the opposition to a reform which on the whole has also received fairly widespread popular support in France - if the most recent opinion polls are to be believed?

Basically the main opposition party, the Socialists, fear that allowing the president to address parliament directly will blur the boundaries between the executive and legislative arms of government.

The separation of powers has been an essential of French politics in all its republics since 1873 and the president has been banned from appearing in person before the National Assembly or the Senate.

In trying to reach a compromise, Sarkozy has suggested an annual state address to parliament along the lines of the US president's state of the nation speech. But even that has met with only lukewarm enthusiasm.

In the past couple of weeks Sarkozy has also made more concessions - proposing for example that opposition parties have equal (television) airtime to address issues raised by the president whenever he appears on the small screen over the course of a year.

But the Socialist party in particular has held firm in maintaining that it will present a united front in Versailles and vote "no".

While it might be hard to figure out exactly why the Socialist party isn't supporting the reform - apart perhaps from refusing to accept a centre-right inspired proposal - it must appear even more difficult to understand why some members of the governing UMP party might break ranks.

There again as the reforms have passed through parliament to the final vote, a number of compromises have been struck which leaves the reform package, as far as some of them are concerned, almost a shadow of what was first put forward.

To get the majority needed, the government is counting on - and indeed will need - some defections from the Left, and one such vote could come in the shape of a high profile former Socialist minister, Jack Lang, who has apparently still not made up his mind how he will vote.

Lang calls the changes modest and far from the wide-ranging proposals envisaged by a parliamentary committee of which he is a member, to look at the overall reform of France's institutions.

Even though the Socialists are calling for a united front in voting "no" in Versailles, which would certainly stop the changes to the constitution being made, there are also some waverers, and they could just tip the balance.

Critics of the Socialist party's stance have claimed that their opposition to the reforms is based more on principle than conviction and a simple look at the latest opinion polls would tell them that a healthy majority of French voters are in favour of the reforms.

In a weekend survey, almost 70 per cent of those asked said they supported the changes.

Stifled jaw jaw time

Constitutional reform is hardly a matter to whet the appetite, but that’s exactly what’s on today’s political agenda as both chambers of the French parliament get together to twiddle with the fundamentals of the Fifth Republic.

It’s all in aid of yet another mouth-watering issue guaranteed to make anyone choke over their early morning cornflakes, ratification of the European Union’s constitution; The so-called Lisbon treaty.

Stifle the yawns and pay attention. This is important stuff – so we are told.

The Treaty would replace the current six-month rotating presidency of the EU with a two-and-a-half year fixed term as well as introduce qualified majority voting on a number of policy areas, which at the moment require a unanimous vote. It’s all in the name of institutional reform, designed to cope with an ever-larger EU.

You might remember that it was France that put the kibosh on the last attempt to introduce an EU constitution when 55 per cent of voters rejected the proposals in a national referendum back in 2005.

A lesson learned as far as the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, was concerned. When he came to power last May, he not only presented himself as the saviour of Europe by proposing a revised “mini treaty” but he also promised that a vote on the issue here would be put to the French parliament rather than to the people.

Both chambers of parliament voted separately in favour of the new treaty last November – with hefty majorities on each occasion, and Sarkozy put his signature to it, along with the leaders of the other 26 EU countries in Lisbon a month later.

But this is where the whole process gets a little complicated and typically French.

Some elements of the EU treaty deal with national sovereignty and as such contravene the existing French constitution. The only way around the problem is to change the French constitution, which can only happen when both parliamentary chambers meet in a joint session, or congress, and approve the required amendments.

That’s what’s scheduled for Monday afternoon. A three-fifths majority of votes cast will be needed for that change to be endorsed.

Once that’s done, the National Assembly and the Senate will both have the green light later this week to discuss the actual terms for making the alterations in the constitution and that will pave the way for the treaty to be adopted finally into French law.

Phew.

The chances of opponents to the Lisbon treaty stopping the process of its ratification in its tracks are minimal – at least here in France. Congress will not be a chance to debate the issue – that has already been done - but simply an occasion for each of the nine parliamentary groupings to state their case for or against a constitutional change. They’ll get a maximum of five minutes each before a vote is taken.

All the same, there are likely to be a lot of long faces, especially on the Left of the political spectrum. The Communist party has not minced its words with its criticism of the way in which it claims Sarkozy has ignored the democratic process here in France, by stifling any debate, taking the final decision away from the French and pushing it through parliament.

But their cause hasn’t been helped much by a divided Socialist party, which wants to avoid a repetition of the internal infighting that occurred back in 2005. It’s still divided over the issue but has recommended in Monday’s vote, that its parliamentarians abstain against the process or the way in which ratification is taking pace – without actually preventing it from happening.

Opponents of the treaty trot out the same arguments that will doubtlessly be heard in many of the 27 EU countries as it goes through its stages of national ratification.

Those include claims that it doesn’t differ substantially from the original plan put to the vote for constitutional reform - and rejected by both the French and the Dutch in national votes,

Whatever the case may be throughout the rest of the EU, it looks as though this time around at least the French are not going to block the process.

A process that Sarkozy hopes will be completed by the end of this year – during guess whose presidency of the EU.