This is the strong theme of the new school year… Certainly, this reform of school rhythms will never stop being talked about…
After the political opposition from right-wing local elected officials under the banner of anti-government rebellion (Christian Estrosi even made it a personal crusade), the decisions of the School Inspector for schedules had given hope that the issue was settled and that we would have (finally?) moved on to something else.
This is what happened practically everywhere except… in Nice where the Mayor changed his stance, moving from rhythms to the wallet!
The message is clear: you wanted the reform against my advice, so go explain to families that it will cost them: 15 euros per child per month, without adjustment based on income as is the case for the Cannes municipality. While in Antibes, it’s free.
The reason? According to the municipality, implementing this new educational policy is estimated to cost 6 million euros which were not found in the budget.
But as the motivation is hardly credible given the significance of the outcome, it is clearly a political decision (or rather a provocation).
This position is, of course, not accepted by the socialist municipal opposition, which has called on families to sign a petition that, to date, has gathered a thousand signatures.
Patrick Allemand, Departmental Socialist Secretary and leader of the municipal opposition in Nice, denounces Christian Estrosi’s decision:
“Refused until the last day by the Mayor of Nice, it is being implemented with almost no consultation, without a Territorial Educational Project (PEDT), and to top it off, these activities will be paid for in a flat fee, while in almost every French city these educational reception times are covered by the municipality. In fact, the mayor of Nice opposed this law from the start and did not implement the necessary meetings and tools to facilitate the implementation of this reform, thus sacrificing the interest of the children. His goal is to stir up resistance to this reform and create a hostile climate from the beginning of the school year.”
Patrick Allemand also considers it a matter of principle: “This flat rate, contrary to all principles of social justice, means that in Nice, parents of students, whether they pay the wealth tax or are recipients of social welfare, will pay the same amount. This results in creating an unequal and discriminatory system that effectively excludes the most modest.”
Indeed, a national perspective shows that the discrimination applied by Nice’s municipal pricing policy is glaring: among the 32 largest French cities (both right and left), 26 apply the principle of free admission, and 5 cities apply a progressive scale with an initial rate of 0.75 euros per month for the most modest families. Only Nice presents the bill to the families!
As a result, the voice of reason comes from Patrick Mottard (Gauche Autrement): “The solution that could achieve consensus would be to grant free access or significant reductions based on resources. This solution would be technically and democratically more acceptable than ad hoc aid granted by the schools’ fund, aid that is more about charity than solidarity. Thus, we could emerge from this controversy with dignity by combining economic efficiency and social justice.”
But ultimately, the question is simple: why should children in Nice not have the same rights to education as other French children? Why should they be hostages to political quarrels that do not concern them?
