Barnier calls for 49.3 and a primary: the right is looking for a method, not yet a direction

Speaking on Public Sénat's morning programme on Thursday 22 October, Michel Barnier delivered two messages that, taken together, say a great deal about the state of the right six months before the presidential election. On the 2027 budget, the former Prime Minister, now an LR member of parliament for Paris, believes the government will have to force it through. On 2027, he argues for a single candidate of the right and the centre, chosen if possible before January, possibly through a primary.

The facts

According to Public Sénat, Michel Barnier believes Sébastien Lecornu's government will have little choice but to use Article 49.3 or ordinances to get the finance bill adopted.

One can take the risk of 49.3 or else try ordinances. — Michel Barnier

He says he shares the goal of bringing the deficit down to 5% of GDP, which he describes as identical to his own when he was at Matignon. He doubts, however, that a compromise is possible with the Socialist Party, even though an agreement of that kind is what allowed the 2026 budget to be adopted, Public Sénat recalls. Still according to the parliamentary channel, interest payments on the debt are expected to rise by around 10 billion euros in 2027, to 72.9 billion.

The parliamentary context lends weight to this forecast. According to LCP, the vote on the revenue part of the budget had to be postponed because the review could not be completed in time. According to a note from the Rexecode institute, the government had promised "neither 49.3 nor ordinances", but Economy Minister Roland Lescure now says he is ready to do "whatever it takes" to adopt the text.

On the presidential race, Michel Barnier reaffirmed his confidence in Bruno Retailleau, president of Les Républicains and a declared candidate, while acknowledging, according to Public Sénat, that his campaign is struggling to take off. A Cluster17 poll for Le Point, conducted on 14 and 15 October, puts Bruno Retailleau and David Lisnard level at 7% each, far behind Marine Le Pen (31%), Jean-Luc Mélenchon (18%) and Édouard Philippe (17%).

The positions

Supporters of 49.3 put forward a serious argument: France cannot afford to remain without a budget, with debt costs rising and markets watching closely. In their view, the Constitution provides this tool precisely for situations of deadlock, and using it is a matter of responsibility rather than authoritarianism.

On the other side, opponents of forcing it through recall that the executive had pledged to let Parliament decide, as Rexecode notes. Michel Barnier himself knows the price of this weapon: it was after a 49.3 on the Social Security budget that his government was brought down in December 2024. As for ordinances, provided for by Article 47 of the Constitution if Parliament has not reached a decision within 70 days, they have never been used for a budget. It would be a first, a few months before a major election.

On the primary, views also differ on the right. According to the website Parlons Politique, David Lisnard, mayor of Cannes and founder of Nouvelle Énergie, is calling for an open primary, while Bruno Retailleau's entourage does not rule it out but asks that its usefulness first be demonstrated. The 2021 precedent weighs heavily: Valérie Pécresse, chosen by a vote of LR members, won 4.78% in the first round in 2022.

The analysis

Michel Barnier deserves credit for consistency: he speaks of debt as a question of justice between generations, and he is right on that point. But Gaullism never confused the authority of the State with bypassing Parliament. 49.3 is legal; it is not a programme. Adopting without a vote a budget that includes, according to Public Sénat, some 54 billion euros in savings means asking the French to accept efforts that no one will have debated to the end. In a country shaken by the violence and protests of recent days, it would add distrust to anger.

The real question is not the tool but the content. A budget compromise remains possible if one agrees to put on the table what the republican right has long refused: a real contribution from the largest fortunes and the biggest companies, in exchange for savings that spare hospitals, schools and local authorities. That is how a majority is found, not by hoping it will not have time to form.

The same reasoning applies to the primary. A selection procedure is no substitute for a political line. If the right and the centre split into several candidacies stuck below 10%, the republican right could be absent from the second round, facing a far right that leads in every scenario tested by Cluster17. But a single candidate without a social programme would only postpone the problem.

Conclusion

Michel Barnier raises two good questions and answers them with two procedural responses. Before choosing between 49.3 and ordinances, between an open or closed primary, the republican right should answer a simpler question: what does it have to offer those who no longer believe the State works for them? And what if the government, before any forced adoption, brought together the parliamentary group leaders around an explicit and public tax compromise?

Article written with the help of artificial intelligence.