Social Security budget, act II: the Cour des comptes sounds the alarm, the Assemblée must choose fairness

On the same day, two contrasting signals were sent about the future of our Social Security system. On the afternoon of Tuesday 20 October, the Cour des comptes presented its report on the financial situation of Social Security to the social affairs committees of Parliament. A few hours later, the Assemblée nationale began examining the 2027 Social Security financing bill (PLFSS) in the chamber, after setting aside a motion to reject it tabled by La France insoumise.

The facts

According to Public Sénat, the Social Security deficit is expected to reach 21.8 billion euros in 2026, despite the brakes applied during the year. The government is aiming for 12.7 billion in 2027, as stated in the minutes of the Council of Ministers of 1 October. The Cour considers this target essential but fragile. According to Europe 1, citing AFP, Bernard Lejeune, president of the sixth chamber, summed up the stakes bluntly:

We must hold to it. — Bernard Lejeune, Cour des comptes

The Cour nevertheless believes that the 1% growth assumption is favourable and that 8.7 billion in savings remain uncertain, Public Sénat reports. The deficit could therefore slip towards 14 to 16 billion. Above all, the debt carried by the Acoss could approach 130 billion euros by 2030, a trajectory the Cour calls unsustainable. Bernard Lejeune speaks of a "highly perilous" situation.

In the Assemblée, LFI's motion to reject was defeated by 259 votes to 128, according to LCP. The left supported it, while the other groups preferred to debate. The text had been rejected in committee on 16 October, but the plenary session starts again from the government's version. The formal vote is scheduled for 27 October, according to the timetable published by NosParlementaires. The vote on the revenue part of the State budget, initially set for the same 20 October, was postponed because the examination of more than 2,800 amendments had not been completed, as LCP explained.

The positions

The government defends a recovery bill. According to LCP, Health Minister Stéphanie Rist called for "lucidity" and "compromise", while Labour Minister Jean-Pierre Farandou spoke of a law in the "general interest". The minutes of the Council of Ministers point out that Social Security spending would still rise by 13 billion, driven by population ageing. The relative majority, through Annie Vidal (Ensemble pour la République), refused to send the text back without debate.

On the left, criticism focuses on how the effort is distributed. According to LCP, LFI MP Hadrien Clouet denounced 12 billion in cuts and a "class-based text", and Socialist Béatrice Bellay a "new social violence". The Rassemblement national, through Christophe Bentz, considers the text unfair but wants to debate it in order to "limit the damage".

The measures at stake are known. The government plans to limit the growth of the national health insurance spending target to 2%, with around 3 billion in savings on medicines, one billion on sick leave and a freeze of family benefits. The Union nationale des associations familiales (Unaf) puts at 600 million euros the refocusing of the back-to-school allowance, which would affect very low-income families, nearly half of them single-parent households. The specialist site Vidal also reports 1.2 billion in coverage shifted to supplementary health insurers.

Analysis

It must be said honestly: the Cour des comptes is right in its diagnosis. A social debt that swells year after year is not an accounting abstraction. It is a burden we pass on to those who will need hospitals, pensions and allowances tomorrow. Social Gaullism has always linked collective protection to sound accounts. Letting the debt slide weakens Social Security itself, and it is the most modest who would pay the price if confidence were to falter.

But the diagnosis does not dictate the treatment. The MPs who voted in committee for amendments pushing the deficit towards 21 billion, according to rapporteur general Thibault Bazin quoted by Europe 1, gave the impression of dodging the issue. Conversely, asking families who receive the back-to-school allowance to contribute to the recovery raises a question of fairness. The sums involved are modest on the scale of the social accounts, but heavy for a household equipping its children in September.

The choice is therefore not between rigour and generosity. It is between a blind effort, spread wherever it is easiest to cut, and a fair effort, proportionate to each person's means. The fight against social fraud, from which the government expects gains of around 300 million euros, can contribute. A greater contribution from capital income and the largest fortunes, advocated by part of the left, also deserves to be examined without taboo, even though its supporters and opponents disagree on its real yield.

Conclusion

Six months before the presidential election, Parliament has one week to prove that it can build a compromise. A simple path is open to MPs: hold to the deficit target set by the government and welcomed by the Cour, while protecting the aid intended for low-income families and seeking savings and revenue where they weigh least on national cohesion. The question is put to every group: would it rather be right alone or succeed together?

Article written with the help of artificial intelligence.