French PM may scrap two public holidays to reduce country's crippling debt
Outlining the 2026 budget on Tuesday, Bayrou suggested Easter Monday and 8 May could become normal workdays – although he said he was open to other options. May 8th is currently when France commemorates Victory Day, marking the end of the second world war.
The centrist prime minister said: 'The entire nation has to work more so that the activity of the country as a whole increases, and so that France's situation improves. Everyone will have to contribute to the effort.'
France is under pressure to bring its public deficit, running at 5.8% of GDP, under the 3% figure required by EU rules, and to rein in €3.3tn of public debt – on which the annual interest, of €60bn, could soon become its biggest budget outlay.
The debt mountain represented a 'mortal danger' for a country 'on a cliff edge' and 'still addicted to public spending', Bayrou said, outlining steps he said would cut €43.8bn from the budget, reducing the deficit to 4.6% next year and 3% by 2029.
Other measures would include an across-the-board freeze on government spending except for debt servicing and the defence sector, which President Emmanuel Macron demanded should be increased by €3.5bn next year and more in 2027.
The budget squeeze will also entail keeping pensions at their 2025 level, capping welfare spending and reducing healthcare expenditure by €5bn. Civil service and government agency salaries would be frozen and public sector job numbers cut.
The move to scrap public holidays is likely to meet strong resistance, although France has previously discussed combining VE Day with Armistice Day on 11 November, creating a single memorial day for the victims of the first and second world wars.
'Cancelling two holidays is a direct attack on our history, our roots and on working France,' said Jordan Bardella of the far-right National Rally (RN), the largest single party in parliament. 'No RN MP will accept a measure that amounts to provocation.'
Other party leaders were equally damning. The proposals were 'an organised hold-up', said Fabien Roussel of the French Communist party. Jean-Luc Mélenchon of the radical left LFI said it was 'time to expel Bayrou' and 'end this destruction, these injustices'.
A Socialist party MP, Boris Vallaud, condemned it as 'a brutal and unacceptable budget'. He added: 'Asking always more from those who have little, and so little from those who have much, is neither serious, effective, nor just.'
Macron's decision to call a snap election last year delivered a hung parliament in which Bayrou does not have enough votes to pass a budget without the support of the left or the right, both of which oppose his proposals for different reasons.
Without an agreement, the veteran prime minister could face a no-confidence motion similar to the one that toppled his predecessor, Michel Barnier, as early as October, when his detailed budget bill is due to go before to parliament.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
14 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
DAN HODGES: Keir Starmer's delusional if he thinks his morally bankrupt plan to let 16-year-olds vote will help him out. They'll NEVER vote for him
It goes without saying that the Government's move to hand the vote to 16-year-olds is intellectually and morally bankrupt. You can determine the legal speed limit. But you aren't actually deemed mature enough to get behind the wheel yourself. You can endorse sending British troops off to fight in a foreign war. But you're not perceived to have sufficient discipline or self-control to join them. You can't be trusted to buy alcohol, get married or own a credit card. But you can help determine the political direction of Britain for half a decade. To be fair, nobody ever seriously pretended there was some great civic imperative behind the change. Angela Rayner made a half-decent fist of it when she claimed: 'For too long public trust in our democracy has been damaged and faith in our institutions has been allowed to decline. We are taking action to break down barriers to participation that will ensure more people have the opportunity to engage in UK democracy.'
The Independent
43 minutes ago
- The Independent
I'm against votes at 16, but this is how I could be persuaded
If I were making the case for votes at 16, I would say that taking part in democracy is so important that people should be encouraged to do it early. I would say that voting is different from other things that people do, and that taking part can help to prepare young people for the responsibilities of citizenship. Instead, we tend to get a lot of false arguments about the other things that 16-year-olds can do and a rhetorical question: why shouldn't they be allowed to vote too? Thus on Thursday, when Angela Rayner, the deputy prime minister, published the government's plan to reduce the voting age, she said that '16- and 17-year-olds can work, pay tax and serve in the military'. Each of those actually undermines her case. They can work, but 14-year-olds can work part-time and it is government policy that 16- and 17-year-olds should be in education or training. You can pay income tax at any age. And though you can join the armed forces, you may not serve in a combat role. In an article in The Times, Rayner went further and said that you can be married at 16. Like most people, she was unaware that the law in England and Wales was changed two years ago, raising the age to 18. The article was quietly corrected. That mistake is the problem in a nutshell. At a time when age thresholds are generally being raised, advocates of votes at 16 have to explain why voting is different from most other things, not why it is the same. In recent years, the age at which young people can get a tattoo or buy superglue, fireworks or cigarettes has been raised to 18. The question is: why should voting be in the smaller category of things you can do at 16 rather than in the larger category of things that adults are allowed to do? I think that voting should be part of adulthood, but I don't feel strongly about it, and I could be persuaded that a special case should be made for a lower age, as it is for sex, medical treatment and driving. But the advocates of child voting really need to up their game. To be fair, Rayner did also make the better argument on Thursday: 'By engaging voters early, when they are young, and allowing them to have a say in shaping their future, we will build the foundations for their lifelong participation in our electoral processes.' There is some evidence for this. A Scottish study found that after the voting age was reduced for everything except UK parliament elections, that cohort 'continued to turn out in higher numbers, even into their twenties, than young people who attained the right to vote later, at age 18'. There are other ways of raising turnout. I am opposed to compulsory voting in principle – part of the point of voting is that it is a voluntary act – but I think that a small cash incentive for first-time voters is a good idea. Other studies have shown that 'voting in one election substantially increases the likelihood of voting in the future'. And if a lower voting age does have a lasting effect in increasing engagement then there is no harm in doing that too. My other objection to votes at 16, however, is the suspicion that it is being done for party advantage. That was plainly the case in Scotland, where David Cameron foolishly allowed Alex Salmond to expand the franchise in order to boost the separatist vote in the 2014 referendum. Cameron's strategy seemed plausible: let the Scottish National Party choose the franchise, the date and the question, and then there could be no argument about the result. Like as if. Equally, Rayner's high-sounding arguments of principle are undermined by the knowledge that there are votes in it for her. The effects of the change are likely to be small. One poll this month, by Focaldata, suggested Labour and the Greens would gain 0.2 percentage points each, at the expense of Reform, Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. But it still stinks. Yes, it was in Labour's manifesto last year, which even used the good argument rather than the bad: 'We will increase the engagement of young people in our vibrant democracy, by giving 16- and 17-year-olds the right to vote in all elections.' That is the correct procedure in a parliamentary democracy: you put it in the manifesto, get elected and enact it in law. But there is an argument that constitutional questions should be treated differently: that is why we had a referendum on changing the voting system in 2011. And Labour ought to worry that in one list of manifesto policies polled it was the only one that more people opposed than supported. That is the clincher for me. I am persuaded that it is good for young people to be engaged in politics. I could accept that Labour is entitled to act in its self-interest, having won a mandate for that explicit policy in the general election, if there was overwhelming support for it. But there is not, not even among 16- and 17-year-olds. So, I realise that it is going to happen, and that it won't be reversed once it has happened, but I wish Labour would drop the nonsense about serving in the military and make a better case of democratic principle.
The Independent
43 minutes ago
- The Independent
Newcastle United transfer news: Yoane Wissa, James Trafford, Randal Kolo Muani and more
Having ended their trophy drought with Carabao Cup success last season, Newcastle United now have work to do in the transfer market. With a return to the Champions League, the Magpies need to strengthen their squad to compete at the highest level. Boss Eddie Howe has made it known that he is looking to work fast this summer, seemingly not wanting to repeat the sort of saga that saw Marc Guehi remain at Crystal Palace despite strong interest last summer. The Saudi-backed club were without any major recruits over the past two seasons due to PSR rules, but started the summer with a big move for Anthony Elanga – with the Nottingham Forest winger joining in a deal worth £55m – and are set to make more notable additions as they continue a pursuit of Eintracht Frankfurt striker Hugo Ekitike. Here's everything you need to know about Newcastle United 's summer transfer plans: There are four key areas of improvement this summer. The first is up front, with the club seemingly hunting for another striker to join the reliable Alexander Isak. Ekitike fits the bill, with the Magpies having already seen a £70m bid rejected. Newcastle needed reinforcements on the right flank too as they prepare to do battle in the Champions League, and with squad depth likely playing a key part in their recruitment plan this summer, the club sealed a deal for Elanga earlier this month. In midfield, the Magpies have plenty of options, with the likes of Sandro Tonali and Bruno Guimaraes probably in no need of additional support. However, another central defender would be a major plus as the club returns to Europe's top club competition, with Guehi having been the notable target last summer. Finally, Newcastle have been linked to signing a new goalkeeper, which has become an apparent area that would benefit from improvement. Despite Nick Pope's class, his injury record has sometimes meant Howe is forced to contend with his his back-up. Done deals Ins: Anthony Elanga (Nottingham Forest, £55m), Antonito Cordero (Malaga, free transfer) Outs: Lloyd Kelly (Juventus, £15m), Sean Longstaff (Leeds United, £12m) Jamal Lewis (out of contract), Callum Wilson (out of contract) Potential targets James Trafford, Burnley In the goalkeeping department, Newcastle's principal target remains James Trafford. The England international, now 22 years old, recorded a remarkable 29 clean sheets in 45 Championship games on route to promotion back into the Premier League with Burnley. He has been a figure of interest for Howe's side in the past, though it looks like they'll face competition from Manchester City. Yoane Wissa, Brentford With the news surrounding Isak and Ekitike, Newcastle quickly moved away from the deal for the Frenchman, and are said to now be interetsed in Brentford's Yoane Wissa. The Congo international could be available for around £50m, with the Bees holding that valuation for their record goalscorer, who grabbed 20 goals in all competitions last season. Randal Kolo Muani, PSG Reports have emerged that the Magpies could be interested in Randal Kolo Muani after their failed pursuit of Hugo Ekitike. They are said to want a striker whether or not Isak leaves, and the PSG man – who spent last season on loan at Juventus – could be a good cut-price option. Axel Disasi, Chelsea Reports from France continue to link Axel Disasi to Newcastle, as was the case during the January window. Chelsea signed the centre-back for around £38m and could be open to a sale, with the Frenchman having spent the second half of last season on loan at Aston Villa.
