This is a first, behind the party president François Bayrou, a segment of the UDF group voted for censure along with the left (PS, PCR, Greens, and radical leftists). It was rejected. This vote requires some explanations provided by Rudy Salles, who is deeply involved in this news as he is a UDF deputy and voted for this motion of censure.
Nice Première: Why vote a censure motion against the government?
Rudy Salles: My vote answers one simple question: Can the government continue like this for another year? The answer is no, and everyone thinks the same. The President of the Republic had to draw conclusions from the political crisis that has been brewing at the highest level of the executive for several weeks: resign, reshuffle the government, dissolve the Assembly (he did it in 1997 when it was not justified at all), or ask the Prime Minister to engage the responsibility of his government before the National Assembly by posing the question of confidence. He did not choose any of these options. In this case, to allow the deputies to express their disagreement on this stalemate and especially to denounce the dysfunctions of our institutions, the only remaining option is the motion of censure. The UDF group, having only 30 deputies, cannot file its own motion. This obliges us to vote for the one filed by the Socialist group.
NP: The UDF group in the National Assembly opposed the budget proposed by the government. Do you consider yourself in the opposition?
RS: We have no intention of joining the left in its battles. It is largely co-responsible for the drifts experienced by the 5th Republic for the past 25 years. On this point, the seven-year terms of François Mitterrand have nothing to envy the terms of Jacques Chirac. We did not vote for confidence in the government a year ago, already sensing what would happen. Likewise, we voted against the 2006 budget because the commitment we had made to our voters was to control public spending, not to worsen France’s abyssal debt. So we simply take this opportunity to use the motion of censure to say “halt, enough is enough!” For the rest, I am not switching to the left, proof being, I vote for the immigration law project.
NP: Some of your UDF colleagues will not vote for this censure motion. Isn’t this a censure motion against François Bayrou?
RS: No, my colleagues make exactly the same observation as François Bayrou and deplore the state of our institutions. They believe that other means should be used to achieve our ends. There is only a divergence on the means, not on the end goal.
NP: “It is not by driving a dagger in the back that we find the paths of political morality.” This statement comes from Jean-Louis Debré, president of the National Assembly. Is the UDF straying by “voting a censure motion based on rumors and chatter” (terms used by Mr. Debré)?
RS: The daggers should be looked for on the side of Villepin and Sarkozy, not our methods. On the contrary, I believe that sooner or later (it is already the case for some), the UMP leaders will thank us for having the courage to say NO to the decline of France. It should also be a Gaullian attitude if I am not mistaken… As for political morality, it is better not to open this debate, there would be too much to say at this moment.
NP: In your opinion, what will be the consequence of this motion of censure and what do you hope for?
RS: This censure motion will not have an immediate effect. Since the UMP is in the majority and the vote is not secret, the government is assured that it will not pass. This motion is symbolic. We will have taken a stand to say that we disapprove of the methods leading France into this deadlock and that we wish for things to change deeply in the future. This situation is bad for our country and for politics. If we did not react as we are doing now, it would once again be a boon for the National Front which thrives on the decomposition of the Republic.
