By evoking the "Whatever the cost" in its annual report, the Court of Auditors welcomes "the results obtained" and "a validated strategy".
A laudatory tone which further reinforces the credibility of a measure that has been little contested since its implementation in March 2020.
Is such excitement deserved?
Rarely has the Court of Auditors been so dithyrambic about public spending.
In its annual report, published on Wednesday, the institution returned to the "Whatever the cost" policy, while the year 2021 was marked by stronger crisis spending than in 2020. In September 2021 , the Minister of Public Accounts estimated that the crisis had cost the State between 170 and 200 billion euros.
Despite these crazy figures, "this strategy has been validated both in principle, by international organizations, and in practice, by the results obtained in terms of activity observed at the end of 2021, which would still be improved compared to the forecasts of the initial finance law for 2022,” the report notes.
With an unemployment rate that returned to its pre-health crisis level in the last quarter and a historic growth rate of 7% in 2021, "the success at the macro level of 'Whatever it takes' is indisputable", confirms Anne-Laure Delatte, economist at the CNRS and specialist in financial and European issues.
Results that are all the stronger as they occur not even two after the start of the crisis.
“During the previous major economic shock, the subprime crisis in 2008-2009, France took six or seven years to return to its pre-crisis level.
There, only a few months, ”also enthuses Jacques Le Cacheux, professor of economics at the University of Pau and specialist in finance.
An imitated and shared success
The French "Whatever it costs" is also reminiscent of the "Whatever it takes", (All that it will take) pronounced by the President of the European Central Bank Mario Draghi in the midst of the economic crisis in 2012. A declaration which had made it possible to limit the breakage – speculation on the Euro Zone having stopped following these words –, but occurred with a few years of delay.
This error was not repeated in 2020, Emmanuel Macron extending the printing press from March and the first confinement.
Proof of the effectiveness of such a measure, it was adopted simultaneously in many other countries.
“All the rich nations that could afford such a measure have put it in place,” sums up Anne-Laure Delatte.
The intensity of "Whatever it takes" across nations would have depended only "on the state of their public finances", reports the economist: "The United States or Germany have, for example, had a massive use of "Whatever it takes", much more than Italy or Spain, with tight budgets.
France has been particularly generous on partial unemployment.
»
An evidence more than a success?
Everything then depends on whether we look at the glass half full or half empty.
The "Whatever it takes" can be seen as the miracle solution, or the banal evidence.
Jacques Le Cacheux: “It was simply a policy of common sense.
Moreover, the measure did not meet with strong opposition.
Whenever there is a crisis – a pandemic, a war, a natural disaster, the State is there to play this role of shock absorber and insurer.
»
All the more so in this specific case: “It is the States which have decided to close the economies, in particular with the confinements.
It is normal for them to compensate for the consequences”, supports the professor.
Reviews and nuances
Even for the debt sometimes dreaded as a measurement time bomb, the finance specialist wants to be reassuring: “It's a lot to pay, but we're talking about a sum spread over several decades.
It was the right decision, and the only viable one.
France has often gone into debt after a disaster, and this has always been a relevant choice.
“For the professor, it is clear that this solution is better than having subjected the French economy to the direct shock of the coronavirus, “in such a case, the country would have recovered much more difficultly.
»
What to definitely make the unanimity?
"If it is indisputable that the money had to be taken out, one can wonder about the way in which it was distributed", strongly nuance Anne-Laure Delatte.
If at the macroeconomic level, “all is well” admits the expert, the success is less glorious by dissecting things a little: “Precariousness has increased, second-line professions are struggling to recruit.
By giving to everyone without compensation, inequalities have widened”, develops the economist.
She concludes: “Whatever it costs will have protected the market very well, a little less the individuals”.
Economy
Coronavirus: The hotel and catering industry lost 237,000 employees during the crisis
Economy
End of “whatever the cost”: Priority sectors expect tailor-made
Court of Audit
state
Emmanuel Macron
Public expenses
Bruno the Mayor
Economy
Coronavirus
0 comment
0 share
Share on Messenger
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on Flipboard
Share on Pinterest
Share on Linkedin
Send by Mail
To safeguard
A fault ?
To print