End of life: a debate spoiled by LREM

The bill on the end of life will be debated this Thursday afternoon in the Assembly.

Yes, finally debated, it is quickly said!

a handful of hours devoted to one subject, euthanasia or planned suicide, which should animate days and days of debate across the country.

Same remark on the title of this bill: to speak of "guaranteeing a free and chosen end of life" is to use a vocabulary which deliberately trivializes the question.

The subject of the choice of his death is so deep, so serious and complex, that it cannot be botched in a few hundred minutes of speech.

It deserves a real debate.

Which means that the debate this Thursday afternoon is not really one?

Exactly.

In reality, the purpose of this debate is to strike a political blow.

This bill has been used by a few hundred En Marche deputies as a political marker: many parliamentarians are indeed convinced that it is necessary (one year before the presidential election) to send a left signal to rebalance a balance sheet that is supposed to pay too much. to the right.

However, the subjects of society are perfectly calibrated for that: to campaign for extended abortion, for assisted reproduction for all or for euthanasia, in the minds of these parliamentarians, is to be progressive.

Banco ...

All the same, we can believe in their sincerity when they defend this law.

Naturally, Nicolas Beytout does not deny it.

And they have even been joined by some members of almost every other political party, who have the same point of view on end of life and took the opportunity to show it.

But when you want to advance such a heavy subject, you don't make the mistake of sabotaging it.

But this is really what will happen: the niche they chose to convey their text had no chance of success.

First, because part of the majority and the government, including the Prime Minister, is against it.

With an unstoppable argument: to talk about facilitating death when hospitals are overwhelmed with patients who are trying to help survive, is really incongruous.

Better: Emmanuel Macron does not support this bill: the country is not ripe, he seems to think.

And he is therefore satisfied to see that the initiative of parliamentarians will go directly into the wall ...

Because she won't be adopted?

Are we sure?

No chance, no.

Because a squad of LR deputies, a bit tricky around the edges, blocked the debate by tabling more than 2,000 amendments, which makes their examination mechanically impossible in the allotted time.

Here it is: to want too much to force a debate of national scale and to send it to the Parliament, one exposes oneself to more cunning than it is.

For its 5th anniversary, this week, the movement La République en Marche has in any case demonstrated that it still has great progress to make in internal consistency and in mastering the workings of political life.