Nice Première: What is your feeling after the three debates?
Nathalie Audin: I believe first of all that these debates have been useful; they were not about testing any particular candidate in the running but about enlightening the activists on the candidates’ orientations. From this point of view, Dominique Strauss-Kahn was able to fully lay out his proposals, with a structuring proposal for each debate: the Elysee Pact in June 2007 for the revival of growth through purchasing power, the renewal of Europe in 2008, and the conference on the environment in 2009.
An agenda from the first to the last day for socialism in power to finally find its place in duration and in the duty of truth.
NP: How would you analyze each one’s performances in a few words?
NA: Laurent Fabius rightly emphasized the social issue, but his perspective and solutions sometimes seemed out of sync with the real answers our fellow citizens expect. I think, for example, of the idea that everything would originate from the law, whereas it is necessary to rely on intermediary bodies (associations and unions) to enable the structural reforms essential to our country.
Ségolène Royal often appeared to me on the defensive about her ideas, on societal issues, and seemed to lack mastery of the major international challenges…
NP: Were you surprised by any of the candidates?
NA: Not really; Dominique Strauss-Kahn demonstrated in these debates his competence, his sense of state, and appeared as the man of solutions. He is the man of the renewal of social democracy.
Laurent Fabius demonstrated his stature but sometimes seemed to give a discourse struggling to connect our ideal with reality.
As for Ségolène Royal, she didn’t surprise me, except for her ideas sometimes being “on the margins” (some might say innovative) compared to the socialist project throughout the internal campaign!
However, I expected her to champion more the idea of innovation, of movement which is the vocation of socialists; we mostly remained in the realm of observation and a kind of mirror reflecting the supposed expectations of public opinion.
NP: In your opinion, will a second round be necessary to elect the socialist candidate for the Presidential election?
NA: It would indeed be necessary to have a second internal round. The unity of socialists is certainly not soluble in a first-round vote on November 16! In the first round, socialists will have to choose an orientation; it’s a choice of conviction, then the one who has the greatest capacity for gathering will win in the second.
All of François Hollande’s authority and consensual spirit will then be needed to avoid unfortunate slip-ups (including local ones) that we have observed these days. We will then rely on him to ensure calm throughout this week. As for the image we send to the right, it will be all the clearer in case of a second round. We are always stronger when we can convince beyond our own camp from the first round, and for that, there must be a second round on November 23!
NP: Finally, what will you do on the day of the militants’ vote?
NA: I will be in my section to vote, to meet all my comrades. This moment is both solemn, but it is also an intense collective moment for all socialists! And I am proud that the socialists have the ability to choose their candidate in this way.
Afterward, I will also meet all the comrades who have supported and defended in all the A-M sections the candidacy of DSK. I can say today a “group is born,” as athletes say. Against all pressures, activists from all backgrounds have rallied behind DSK’s ideas in our department; it is proof that Politics in the service of social transformation has and will still have meaning in our Party and in service of our values and to serve our country.
