|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: France
France: Socialist Party attempts left re-packaging
of Ségolène Royal
By Antoine Lerougetel
28 February 2007
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
The past two weeks have seen an attempt to repackage Ségolène
Royal, the Socialist Party (PS) candidate in the French presidential
elections April 22, as a more left-wing figure. She declared on
France Inter Radio on February 26 that any confusion between the
left and the right in French politics is very dangerous
and would prevent French people from choosing between two
social models, two opposing political visions.
Royal was asked about the desirability of a French-style
coalition government (coalition à la française),
which has been raised as a possibility by François Bayrou,
the candidate of the centre-right UDF (Union for French Democracy).
She commented We cannot take France forward with a drop
of social policy in an ocean of economic liberalism, which is
what both the right-wing candidates are proposing.
In opinion polls, Bayrou is presently running third with 17
percent of voters choosing him in the first round, behind the
ruling Gaullist UMP (Union for a Peoples Party) candidate
Nicolas Sarkozy and Royal, who are both at 28 percent.
This left tack by Royal is instructive. Official circles and
the media have insisted that the current presidential election
campaign marks a significant departure, in that both Royal and
Sarkozy recognise that Frances economic and social problems
stem from the failure of the its social democratic model, as opposed
to the Anglo-Saxon model.
According to this argument, the supposed commitment to égalité
[equality] has to be put aside. Moreover, the considerable cost
of the French welfare state, which creates an environment not
conducive to business, has to be reduced. Above all, the
pundits argue that the countrys problems have been epitomised
by the inability of French governments to push though the economic
and social reforms required in the face of the determined
resistance of the working class and the youth over the past two
decades.
The mass mobilisation of 2006 against the CPE First Job Contract
was the most recent expression of this resistance, which also
exploded in the form of the riots on urban council estates in
the autumn of 2005 in defiance of the law-and-order methods imposed
by the UMP government.
Both Royal and Sarkozy present themselves as candidates of
change and put forward right-wing remedies hostile
to the interests of the broad mass of the people.
Sarkozy proclaims himself the representative of a rupturea
break with past compromises, a strong man, an avowed economic
liberal who, at the same time, is aware of the dangers of social
divisions in France and the discrediting of the political establishment.
He proposes to combine pro-business policies with measures
to win a popular base in sections of the middle class and even
the working class by allowing them to become homeowners and by
eliminating disincentives to hard work such as the
35-hour week and high levels of taxation. Alongside the profound
undercurrents of anti-Islamic racism in his campaign, he proposes
positive discrimination (affirmative action) to secure a social
base in the immigrant middle class. His initiative in setting
up the CFCM (French Council of the Muslim Religion) had the same
objective.
Royal initially portrayed herself, with the necessary caveats,
to be the French equivalent of Britains Tony Blaira
moderniser who recognised that the old-style social
reformism could no longer be sustained. She proposes a more business-friendly
programme with lower taxes and targeted, as opposed to universal,
welfare provisions. At the same time, she offered herself as the
best candidate to prevent the eruption of further social strugglesa
calmed-down France.
Like Blair, she made much of her relative independence from
the Socialist Party apparatus as proof that she was capable of
pushing through economic reforms without bowing to pressure from
the working class.
It must be noted in this regard, however, that one of Sarkozys
innovations has been an attempt to cultivate the trade unions
as a means of pushing through his policies.
Unfortunately for Royal, the first weeks of the campaign exposed
the fault-line running through her programme: in trying to please
everyone, she pleased no one. In the first place, her economic
appeal to French business circles appeared less radical than Sarkozys:
in particular, she was not considered committed enough to carry
out an all-out assault on the welfare state in contrast to the
semi-Bonapartist strong man Sarkozy.
Sarkozy has been able to galvanise some support among disaffected
sections of the population who recognise that the French economy
is indeed in crisis and entertain illusions that he might bring
about a change. In contrast, the traditional support for the Socialist
Party in layers of the working class and middle class, Royals
electoral mainstay, is already in steep decline because of the
partys previous right-wing course and further diminished
with every word she uttered.
Poll after poll showed that most workers were convinced that
she was pro-business, while few have been fooled by her expressions
of compassion.
By the time of the February 11 rally at Villepinte, at which
she finally detailed her election programme, after having listened
to the people, Royal was running 10 points behind
Sarkozy in the opinion polls. It was in an attempt to rectify
this situation and avert an electoral debacle that she emphasised
her limited programme of social reforms.
When this did not succeed in raising her ratings in the polls,
she adopted her pose of feminine compassion more forcefully in
her appearance on TV in the programme I have a question
to ask you on February 19.
On both occasions, she made much of her recognition of the
crisis in the banlieues, the impoverished urban estates,
and claimed that she could heal France.
Three days after the latter show, she launched her new campaign
team, which included all the grandees of the Socialist Party.
It incorporates three former prime ministersLionel Jospin,
Laurent Fabius and Pierre Mauroyand former ministers such
as Dominique Strauss Khan, all of whom have occupied the highest
echelons of the party since the beginning of the 1980s.
It is most likely that the inclusion in Royals campaign
team of these PS elephants, as they are known in France,
is an attempt by the party apparatus to take control of a campaign
that was going off the rails. But it was also an attempt to paint
Royal as a representative of Socialist Party continuity rather
than change, which to many, quite rightly, signifies
further attacks on the social position of the working class.
As reassurances go, this was hardly the most convincing. All
of those drafted onto Royals campaign team played key roles
in imposing right-wing policies that have led to the plummeting
support in the working class for the PS. In 1981, when François
Mitterrand won the presidency for the Socialist Party on a programme
of left social reforms and nationalisations, people danced in
the streets and a rejoicing crowd took over the Place de la Bastille.
But many of the 110 points in Mitterrands programme were
abandoned a little more than a year later in favour of austerity
policies aimed at preventing a run on the franc and shoring up
French capitalism.
In contrast, after Jospins Plural Left governments
defeat in 2002, Socialist Party leaders could not show their faces
on protests against the Gaullist governments anti-working
class measures for fear of being driven off by angry workers.
Nevertheless, the attempt to resuscitate Royals campaign
by making a feint to the left serves to expose the true nature
of Sarkozys recent ascendancy. It does not indicate a pronounced
support for his right-wing line, but is essentially due to the
fact that socialist-minded workers and young people have been
politically disenfranchised by Royal and the Socialist Party.
Most of those who have deserted the Socialist Party have not
gone over to Sarkozy, but have decided that there is no point
in voting. Recent polls indicate that 27 percent of the electorate
would abstain or cast a blank vote in the first round, and 30
percent would do likewise in the second round run-off between
the two leading candidates.
Royals attempted repositioning is primarily a matter
of style, not substance, and most people recognise this. There
has been a certain rise in support for her reflected in opinion
polls since February 19, but this is relatively superficial. Figaro
reported a poll that said that 81 percent of respondents found
Royals television performance sympathique
(pleasant), as against 45 percent who found her convincing.
Her ability to win popular backing as the defender of the welfare
state is limited, given that the essential thrust of her policies
is dictated by big business and the requirements of finance capital
for France to become globally competitive. During her television
debate, she was unable to give an answer as to how her social
measures would be financed. The resignation of a campaign staff
member, rebuked for prematurely releasing the figure of 35 billion
euros (US$46.3 billion) as the cost of her social measures, has
increased scepticism. The fact that she had pledged to make the
reduction of the public debt a priority also undermined her promises
on this score.
Already, Royal has disappointed the 2.5 million people in the
private sector who live on the state minimum wage, admitting that
the promised raise to 1,500 euros per month from the present 1,254
gross (984,61 euros netUS$1,303), a flagship measure of
her social programme, would be before deductions. This keeps the
actual cash received down to little more than 1,000 eurosaround
250 euros a week! Even this paltry concession would take five
years to be fully implemented.
She insisted, in line with Sarkozy, that all those receiving
benefits must actively seek employment, a recipe for forcing
unemployed people into low-paid jobs. This puts a sinister colouration
on her pledge that no school leaver would have to wait six months
before finding a job or training.
She also reiterated her opposition to any mass regularisation
of undocumented migrants and commitment to strict immigration
controls.
Any success enjoyed by Royals manoeuvres only serves
to disarm the working class. Whoever assumes the presidency when
the votes in the second round on May 1 are counted, will proceed
to make a systematic assaultlong overdue as far as the French
bourgeoisie is concernedon wages, working conditions and
social and democratic rights.
A politically reprehensible role is played by the parties considered
to be to the left of the Socialist Partythe Communist Party,
the Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire and Lutte
Ouvrièrewho insist that a victory for Royal and
the Socialist Party in the second round is the only alternative
to Sarkozy. Indeed, her present manoeuvring is in part designed
to make it easier for them to give her their support. She is advised
in such matters by a former central committer member of the LCR
and personal confidante, Sophie Bouchet-Petersen.
Despite criticisms of aspects of Royals programme by
these lefts, their fundamental task of reconciling
the working class to the Socialist Party is well expressed by
Arlette Laguiller, Lutte Ouvrières presidential
candidate. In a November 24 editorial, she told readers of the
partys newspaper that workers could, of course, rejoice
if Ségolène Royal wins the presidency because that
would mean a defeat for Sarkozy. She even suggested that
Royal could be induced to act in the interests of the working
class: The presidential election is in five months. Ségolène
Royal will have the time to make some commitments which she has
not so far taken.
See Also:
Gaullist presidential candidate Sarkozy
allies with Italys post-fascists
[23 February 2007]
France: Royals campaign falters
as Sarkozy consolidates support of big business
[19 February 2007]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |