Covid: MEPs reject a repeal of the vaccination obligation for caregivers

The parliamentarians rejected in the Social Affairs Committee one by one the articles of a bill from the communist group which aimed to reverse this obligation in force for 18 months, and allow the rapid reintegration of professionals.

The text will nevertheless be on the menu of the Assembly on May 4, as part of a day whose agenda is set by the Communists.

“The pandemic has separated us, divided us” et “it is our responsibility as legislators to promote appeasement”, defended its author, Jean-Victor Castor, elected representative of Guyana. He invokes the fact that the vaccination obligation has had “devastating effects” overseas where the reluctance is stronger.

“This is the way of reason”

The High Authority for Health (HAS) itself recommended on March 30 to “lift the vaccination obligation” once morest the Covid for caregivers, and the Minister of Health François Braun indicated that he would follow this opinion, by a forthcoming decree.

The Minister promised to “concerting the hospital federations and the orders of the health professions” with a view to the reintegration of professionals, around 0.3% of hospital agents and less than 2,000 among the liberals.

“This is the way of reason”supported Renaissance MP Jean-François Rousset in committee.

Mr. Castor wanted to maintain his bill because the decree to come “would only suspend, (and) not repeal” vaccination obligation.

In a sometimes tense climate, all the oppositions supported his text, except the Socialists who abstained.

“False Debate”

Eric Alauzet (Renaissance) denounced a text by“display”Frédéric Valletoux (Horizons) an “unhealthy populism” in the “country of Pasteur”.

Pierre Dharréville (PCF) pointed the finger at him “false debate” in between “the camp of good” et “the camp of evil”.

The balance of power veered in favor of the presidential majority, which voted for amendments to delete each article of the text.

The Communists had put the subject back on the table, following heated debates last November in session during a “niche” LFI. The presidential camp had made a barrage of amendments to prevent a similar proposal from being put to the vote.

Share:

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
LinkedIn

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.