The government’s crisis and the highlighting of the opposition from certain ministers (Montebourg, Hamon, and Filippetti) to the political line of the Valls Government is not without consequence at the level of the Alpes-Maritimes department.
The Nice left expresses itself in its plurality following the crisis that erupted this weekend and at the beginning of this week.
In fact, the fire was smoldering under the ashes and it only took a spark to ignite it… Will there be a rupture in the internal balances of a party already significantly weakened after the municipal and European electoral setbacks?
Within the socialist party, two lines of conduct oppose each other:
David Nakache, federal secretary PS06 of the “ideas laboratory – Socialist against austerity,” adopts a caustic tone: on behalf of @MontebourgTeam, he asserts that “to be in coherence with the line of the President of the Republic and the Valls government means not respecting the 60 commitments of the electoral campaign and especially halting the fight against finance.”
In contrast, Xavier Garcia, spokesperson for the PS in the Alpes-Maritimes, supports the President of the Republic’s decision. His thesis is simple: “One can discuss and disagree on different options within a party, but a minister cannot be against the line of the government of which he is a part.”
For him, this is an essential question for its functioning and efficiency. How can one refute him?
Finally, Patrick Mottard (PRG06/Another Left) also analyzes this new situation with relevance and perspective:
“Beyond the fundamental question of the relevance of the current economic policy of the government, Arnaud Montebourg – for whom I actually have the greatest personal sympathy – made two major errors.
The first is to have confused the governance of France with that of the Socialist Party. In the PS, it is common to belong to a majority and a leadership whose orientations are openly criticized. This is due to the suicidal logic of the currents: in the party leadership, one primarily represents their faction and takes stances to strengthen it outside of any solidarity.
A government, on the other hand, must demonstrate coherence, if only for reasons of international politics. A minister, according to the famous Chevènement formula – which we have been repeatedly reminded of today – “shuts up or resigns.”
This type of confusion does not really surprise me on the part of Benoît Hamon, as he is a product of this system. It surprises me much more coming from Montebourg, whom I knew well in the PS and who, at the time, avoided the apparatus constraints, allowing an image of a statesman to emerge.
The second error is to believe that public opinion and voters will distinguish between the responsible figures of the current majority at the time of future electoral deadlines. The course set by Valls, whether we rejoice in it or lament it, will be maintained until the end of François Hollande’s mandate. By the term of office, there may be a place for a turning point (like Mitterrand in 1983), not for a zigzag.
Success is not guaranteed, far from it, but the defeat of the Valls line would be that of the entire left and therefore of its internal opposition. Arnaud included.”
To be continued…
