A new motion of censure against Elisabeth Borne and her government will be examined from 4 p.m. this Monday, June 12, 2023 at the National Assembly. It is the group Nupes which is at the initiative of this text. It seems difficult to see this political stunt succeed.
Valérie Rabault, Socialist MP for Tarn-et-Garonne, carries this motion of censure. This is the 17th debated in the National Assembly in less than a year for the government of Elisabeth Borne. It is unlikely that this will succeed due to the positioning of the LR group. The Prime Minister referred to this vote on France 3: “Regularly, some of the opposition leads us to demonstrate again that there is no relative majority in the Assembly.”
Clémentine Autain, on France 2, estimated that the rallying of RN deputies “is not worth an alliance, but it is a story of general objective”. According to the rebellious deputy, the result “will be very close, very fair”. The Liot deputies, in a statement, stress that “the conditions for success are not currently met, in particular because of the attitude of part of the Les Républicains group.” Aurélien Pradié, LR deputy who voted last March for the motion brought by the Liot group, considered with RMC that the Nupes initiative was “disconnected from the subject, from the pension reform”, so he should not vote.
The challenge to the pension reform is at the heart of the Nupes attempt. The left alliance does not digest the inadmissibility, pronounced by Yaël Braun-Pivet, of a text carried by the independent group Liot on Thursday June 8. This bill aimed to repeal retirement at age 64.
In detail, here are the votes by political group in favor of the motion of censure tabled by the Nupes group (coming soon):
Two options are possible for each deputy: voted for or did not vote. In accordance with article 154 of chapter XI of the regulations of the National Assembly, “only the deputies in favor of the motion of censure take part in the ballot.” Thus, the opposition to the motion of rejection is marked by an absence of vote of the elected and not by an explicit choice of “against”.
