One might limit oneself to this simple comment on such a long day: “bis repetita”.
The debate on the preliminary budget, which the Metropolitan Council approved with 107 in favor out of 126 voters, was just a photocopy of the one that took place a few weeks ago during the sessions dedicated to budgetary orientations.
In fact, the majority and the oppositions remained in the same positions and maintained the same analysis. While numbers are indeed numbers, it’s true that they can be made to say whatever one wants.
So here it is, as Christian Estrosi speaks of “a 2019 budget that is a vector of our political ambitions for tomorrow” and “a multi-year investment plan for growth and employment”, his left-wing opponent Patrick Allemand (PS) denounces that “despite an unprecedented level of debt, despite unprecedented tax levies, equipment expenses are decreasing,” and the far-right Marie-Christine Arnautu (RN) describes it as “the infernal triptych: fiscalism, over-indebtedness, and poor spending”.
The president of the finance committee Philippe Pradal defended the budget’s architecture and highlighted two essential pillars, an investment volume of 375 million euros in investment expenses including 140 million for the main budget alone and the control of operating expenses with the signing of the trust contract with the State which limits the increase to 0.75% (adjusted to 0.89 with bonus) per year and my debt repayment capacity under the standard ratio of 12 years. It makes no difference.
If Marie-Christine Arnautu (RN) points out “the metropolitan debt which will worsen by 112 million euros with its stock as of December 31, 2019, expected to reach around 1.6 billion euros.”
On his side, Patrick Allemand (PS) revisits the debt “which continues to soar. It was 1 billion 293 million euros on January 1, 2018. It will be 1 billion 497 million euros on January 1, 2019” before highlighting that “the interest on the debt reaches 37.45 million euros. […], the metropolis will spend 7 times less on economic development than on the repayment of debt interest” and concludes on a controversial note “the investment budget for housing will decrease from 8.2 million to 6.3 million euros […] while you have allocated over 2 years, 3.9 million euros to the artistic accompaniment of line 2”.
Indeed, a few more housing units would have been preferable to a few less inaugurations!
On the sidelines of this session, it is necessary to return to the intervention of councilor Christelle D’Intorni who, a lawyer by profession, expressed herself with an exalted prose and virulent tones against the presented budget. In fact, it was unclear if she was speaking on her own behalf or by delegation of others as her argument was so provocative, she prompted a general reaction from the assembly who booed her, the responses and punctuations from councilors Leonelli, Paul, Bogini, and Nรฉgre, and the paternalistic reply from Christian Estrosi.
The catastrophic economic situation of the Tinรฉe Valley, which was her point of attack, received a formal denial from the mayors of the municipalities in this valley. In the evening, the construction business group, cited by the complainant as being in crisis, sent out a statement reporting the good economic health of the companies comprising it.
Conclusion: evidently, Mrs. D’Intorni’s artillery batteries need to be subject to revision. As for the gunboat…
