budget, pensions… Non-debating art in the city council
There are many of these sessions on the hunger agenda: everyone resorts to truancy to try to start a fire. In this exercise, Nicolas Florian (LR) tries to bring the debate to the budget field. The day before, he laid out the main outlines of the budget he was recommending for the City. But now, the majority are choosing to leave after the statutory deadline (March) to vote.
Crisis doubling calls into question the “ambitious” budget trajectory chosen by the municipality at the start of its mandate. In that sense, the March 7 meeting would have been a real moment of truth. It has not escaped anyone that with blazing energy prices, inflation and the costs associated with increasing civil service index points, Bordeaux has no untied wallet. Even tends to stunt. The former mayor put his foot on the plate: “You can’t propose a budget debate. Yes, you have decided to raise taxes, say so! I sounded the alarm signal. We don’t need to raise taxes. In Metropolis, the budget has been chosen, but in Bordeaux, we are indifferent to presenting the slightest orientation! »
“Your position, we know it, you were at the demonstration! »
Ingredients carefully dosed to get the mayor off his hinges. No need. “We will discuss this debate in the next session. And we will do more than you have done”, replied Pierre Hurmic.
Dura lex, sed lex
But the board’s big business is focused on pension reform. To be precise, on the agenda for exchanging views on a topic that mobilized tens of thousands of people, this Tuesday in Bordeaux. Among them, Pierre Hurmic and many of his elected officials. This is where things got bad.
The mayor had informed the group leader about this the day before. The rules state that the inclusion of a subject on the agenda must be done five days in advance. Dura lex, sed lex (The law is harsh, but that is the law). MP Thomas Cazenave (Renaissance/Bordeaux Ensemble) denounced “Pierre Hurmic’s cruel diversion and instrumentalization of the municipal apparatus in pension reform. It is up to the Parliament that votes the law, it is up to the MPs to discuss it and not to the elected representatives of the Bordeaux city council. Bordeaux residents will appreciate the time offered to elected officials by their mayor to discuss matters not under his jurisdiction.
Nicolas Florian followed in the footsteps of his former ally in the second round of the municipal election: “We are not going to participate in this debate on a matter of form. Admit that this is a bit of a trap. And then your position, we know it, you are at the demonstration! Renouveau Bordeaux turned and left the session.
The other opposition is asking for the floor. Pierre Hurmic gave it to his assistant, Sylvie Schmitt. A roar rang out from the seats of the Bordeaux Ensemble. The mayor intervenes: “I’ll give you the floor after… Ah well, they’re gone too” In front of a half-empty room, all shades of majorities compete in the argument against reform: communists, ecologists, socialists. Each intervention was praised by their peers. Curious sight.
Myriam Eckert, the sole representative of the Bordeaux en Luttes collective since the split in the group, was stunned: “It’s great to see you applauding… It’s been 28 weeks since the pediatric department of Pellegrin hospital went on strike. They saw no one, not the elected majority. Where are you ? If I stay, it’s to let you know that I’m not even aware of this retirement debate. I’m also an elected representative, that’s an insult,” he stung. He put down his yellow vest and left the room. Pierre Hurmic closed the session by denouncing pension reform. The herd applauded. And they also ended up leaving.
The Bordeaux Ensemble has called for the creation of a commission of inquiry on the “permanent democracy” advocated by Hurmic’s team. “No consultations have ever been carried out on topics of interest to the everyday life of Bordeaux residents, believes Fabien Robert. However, since 2020, the committee has no longer met, while the last deliberation was voted on in 2014 with the provision of five meetings per year. We therefore consider that the functioning of the local democracy in Bordeaux is illegal. »