Repeal of the pension reform: “It would be a question of growing up!”

Free forum

The repeal of the pension reform, under debate in Parliament, has never been so close. But the French must stop deluding themselves and stop believing in false promises, warns Bruno Chrétien, president of the Institute of Social Protection.

• 
  

  To safeguard
  

  
  
  

  Saved
  

When we hear the retirement proposals of certain political leaders wishing to access the highest positions, we cannot help but think of the famous formula of Hubert Bonisseur de la Bath – alias Jean Dujardin – in OSS 117: “It would be about growing up.” Our country has never recovered from the disastrous economic and social consequences of retirement at 60 introduced in 1982. Not to mention the impact of the 35-hour week, the RTT and the hardship account. As a result, our public debt amounts to more than 3,228 billion euros, without us seeing the slightest serious prospect of debt reduction.

However, the New Popular Front like the National Rally have maderepeal of the recent pension reform one of their priority projects if they were to govern France. And it is clear that given the composition of the National Assembly, it is not not impossible that the repeal could be voted on. But would it be relevant? If we could go back in time, we could pose the following problem to a student at the end of the 19th century taking his school certificate:

Or a country whose:

• The initial state budget for 2024 was forecast to show a deficit of more than 21%, the deficit of 5.1% of GDP serving as a communication artifice masking a much more degraded financial situation (in 2024, forecast deficit initial of 148 billion euros for expenditure of 684 billion euros);
• Retirees stop working earlier than their European neighbors and have a higher standard of living than workers;
• Mandatory pensions benefited from an increase of more than 5.3% at the start of 2024 (i.e. 36% more than the average salary increase in 2023), representing an overall expenditure of more than 14 billion euros;
• Pensions provided by compulsory schemes represent nearly 13.5% of GDP, or 2 to 3 points more than the average of its European neighbors.

Question : This country adopted a reform in 2023 postponing the retirement age by 2 years in order to maintain a high standard of living with pensions. Is it possible to cancel this reform while safeguarding the purchasing power of retirees?

There is no doubt that our student would wonder if there is not a wolf in the problem statement as the expression of the parameters provides the answer in an obvious manner.

“An infernal mechanism whose ingredients are known”

And yet in 2024, there are plenty of political leaders who do not hesitate to promise such illusions. That such proposals are considered desirable by the French says a lot about the appalling economic ignorance of a significant part of our fellow citizens. But it would therefore be too easy to criticize policies without questioning the reasons which push the French to prefer these attractive solutions but without a future.

It could be objected that to finance these additional expenses – linked to the abandonment of a pension reform postponing the retirement age by 2 years – it would be enough to make the richest pay. But let’s not forget that for every French person, a rich person is the one who earns more than him and above all that it is difficult to believe that the people whose taxes would increase to balance their pensions would accept it without reacting. An infernal mechanism will then begin very quickly, the ingredients of which are known: drop in foreign investment, flight of the wealthiest and most innovative French people, further deterioration of the country’s budgetary situation with, in the end, a accelerated impoverishment of the French.

If the French want to maintain this model of social protection to which they are attached and of which retirement constitutes one of the pillars, then yes really for those who are deluded, “it would be about growing up”. Especially since many avenues exist for seriously reform our retirement system : rethink the long careers system so that it really targets people whose life expectancy is shorter, improve the situation of women receiving a survivor’s pension or even question the revaluations of pensions which have benefited retirees in recent years in relation to assets. But for this to happen, we will have to collectively demonstrate reason and courage. Are we ready for it?