The French magazine "Le Point" said that President Emmanuel Macron failed to convince the people to reform his pension system, and made 5 mistakes that led to the current situation, which is described as a "scene of ruin."

She added that although Macron was right to choose to pass the pension bill through the third constitutional paragraph of Article 49, instead of voting on it before a national assembly that does not seem to approve it, he has made a series of mistakes that have led to the current situation, which is described as a "scene of ruin."

The newspaper explained – in an article by Herve Gatneau – that the president, with this choice, preferred efficiency to boldness, and saw that defeat by a few votes is much worse than admitting failure represents personal humiliation and definitive deficit until the end of his term, and who would prefer crushing defeat to painful victory? The writer wonders.


To justify this choice, the president told his ministers during the last crisis meeting before the announcement — and what he says will have an impact on his image and survival — that he could not expose the project to such a random vote, and "we cannot play with the future of the country," to comment that presidents always tend to confuse their fate with that of the country.

Macron said the "financial and economic risks" seemed to him "too big to abandon reform". But this "reform" has not been well done, as many officials admit, and Macron has found himself in a predicament followed by a series of mistakes for which he was not the only perpetrator, but for which it is not fair that he is not primarily responsible.

The newspaper detailed Macron's mistakes as follows:

1- The fix will not be the last

The government failed to convince that the reform would be enough to ensure the long-term viability of the system when it agreed to leave work at age 64, while most European countries set the legal retirement age between 65 and 67.

The "accompanying measures," which were added over the course of discussions and negotiations with the public, added new weight to the topic, meaning that reform will be abundant, but not as much as hoped. It may be enough "to ensure balance until 2030, but it will not be enough to dispense with other reforms in the future," as one expert summs.


2- Shield not fuse

The "constructive" approach advocated by Prime Minister Elizabeth Bourne has failed, especially since she, with the loss of an absolute majority in the Assembly, should have agreed with political parties and groups, which was not done.

The outcome would be sad for Bourne and threaten her future at the Palais Matignon, especially since there are two situations in which the head of government is at risk: when he overwhelms the president and when he stops protecting him;

3- Republicans do not control their followers

The prime minister found it difficult to negotiate with a partner who did not know what he wanted, referring to Republicans, while the unions knew what they did not want, which was reform.

This came after the Republicans became torn between its aspiration to remain a government party and the temptation to entrench itself in the opposition to take advantage of Macron's unpopularity.

Thus, it was difficult for Bourne to understand this, because she does not know the deputies well and knows nothing about the life of the party, and in front of her are leaders who do not control their followers.


4- Tempting the right instead of weakening it

Weakening the right was Macron's successful tactic, which helped him settle in power after his election in 2017 and then re-elect him by pulling moderate votes from him.

But his result prevents him from ruling alone, and the Republicans can no longer provide him with enough reinforcement, so it would have been better for him to seek to seduce the right than to weaken it, so he is now paying the price for this miscalculation.

5. Preparing minds for the adoption of Article 49.3

According to the author, the third paragraph of Article 49 "is not as some fools think" represents a violation of democracy, but on the contrary is designed not to paralyze the legitimate government in the absence of an absolute majority.

It means allowing members of parliament to pursue a policy that is not necessarily their own, without having to agree to it, but Macron and Bourne made the mistake of exaggerating that it should not be resorted to, repeating that they would do everything to avoid it.

It would have been better to prepare people's minds by saying that reform is so important that the government must take responsibility, and the result will be the same, without the government looking like a failure.