2024-09-07 06:00:09
LThe hypothesis that France could find itself without a budget for the 2025 financial year is now being raised. However, it seems that the 1958 Constitution anticipated this type of political crisis. Thearticle 47 of the Constitution was deliberately designed to deal with situations where there is no budget at the beginning of a financial year. This provision is intended to ensure the financial continuity of the State.
The constitutional provision was expressly adopted to avoid a type of situation, common under previous regimes, when the budget debate continued even after the financial year had begun. The solution to such a political situation is radical. The provision provides that Parliament has a period of seventy days to deliberate on the draft finance bill. Paragraph 3 specifies: “If Parliament has not ruled within seventy days, the provisions of the bill may be put into effect by ordinance.”
This situation has never occurred in the history of the Ve Republic. The debate is likely to focus on the meaning of the expression “to decide”. One interpretation could be that Parliament could decide negatively, by rejecting the government’s budget. This interpretation does not correspond to the spirit of the Constitution. Paragraph 2 of Article 39 of the Constitution excludes Parliament from presenting an alternative proposal to the government’s finance bill. With regard to the budget, the government has exclusive competence. Parliament can only decide effectively by adopting the finance bill, either in its entirety or with amendments. So if Parliament were to reject the budget, it could not be said that it had decided within the meaning of Article 47 of the Constitution.
In the event of obstruction by Parliament, the government would therefore be entitled to promulgate its draft finance bill by way of an ordinance. From a legal point of view, what remedies would be available to parliamentarians? They would not be able to refer the matter to the Constitutional Council, which is only competent to review a finance bill duly voted by Parliament. The appeal would therefore have to be brought before the Council of State. It is very unlikely that this institution, concerned with the continuity of the State, would accept the idea that Parliament had actually “decided” by rejecting the budget.
Solution radicale
Table of Contents
- 1 Solution radicale
- 2 Here are some potential “People Also Ask” (PAA) questions related to the topic “France’s Budget Crisis: Understanding the Role of Article 47 of the Constitution”:
- 3 Here are some People Also Ask (PAA) related questions for the title **”France’s 1958 Constitution: A Safety Net for Budget Crises”**:
Table of Contents
You have 51.77% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.
1725740146
#French #government #powerful #arsenal #impose #budget
France’s Budget Crisis: Understanding the Role of Article 47 of the Constitution
As France faces the possibility of not having a budget for the 2025 financial year, attention has turned to Article 47 of the 1958 Constitution, which was specifically designed to deal with such political crises. This provision aims to ensure the financial continuity of the State in situations where there is no budget at the beginning of a financial year. But how does it work, and what are the implications for the French government and Parliament?
The Constitutional Provision
Article 47 of the Constitution states that if Parliament has not ruled within seventy days of the submission of the draft finance bill, the provisions of the bill may be put into effect by ordinance. This provision has never been invoked in the history of the Fifth Republic, and its application raises several questions about the role of Parliament and the government in the budgetary process.
The Meaning of “Decide”
One of the key issues is the interpretation of the expression “to decide” in Article 47. Does it mean that Parliament can decide negatively, by rejecting the government’s budget, or does it require a positive decision, in the form of adopting the finance bill? The Constitution suggests that the latter is the case, as Parliament is excluded from presenting an alternative proposal to the government’s finance bill.
Government’s Exclusive Competence
In matters of budget, the government has exclusive competence, and Parliament can only decide effectively by adopting the finance bill, either in its entirety or with amendments. This means that if Parliament were to reject the budget, it could not be said that it had decided within the meaning of Article 47.
Implications for Parliamentarians
In the event of obstruction by Parliament, the government would be entitled to promulgate its draft finance bill by way of an ordinance. But what remedies would be available to parliamentarians? They would not be able to challenge the ordinance in court, as it would be a valid exercise of the government’s constitutional powers.
France’s Budget Situation
The current budget situation in France is precarious, with a public debt expected to reach 112.3% of GDP in 2024, up from 110.6% in 2023 [[1]]. The government has announced €10 billion in budget cuts, affecting various sectors, including education, justice, and defense [[2]]. The Cour des Comptes has reported a budget deficit of €173 billion for 2023 [[3]].
Conclusion
Article 47 of the French Constitution provides a safety net for the government in situations where there is no budget at the beginning of a financial year. While it has never been invoked before, it may become a crucial tool in resolving the current budget crisis. However, it also raises important questions about the role of Parliament and the government in the budgetary process, and the limits of parliamentary obstruction. As France navigates this complex situation, it is essential to understand the constitutional framework that underpins the budget process.
France’s 1958 Constitution: A Safety Net for Budget Crises
As France faces the possibility of entering the 2025 financial year without a budget, the country’s 1958 Constitution provides a solution to this potential political crisis. Article 47 of the Constitution was specifically designed to address situations where there is no budget at the beginning of a financial year, ensuring the financial continuity of the State [[1]].
Avoiding Budget Debacle
The constitutional provision was adopted to prevent a situation common under previous regimes, where budget debates continued even after the financial year had begun. To avoid this, Article 47 provides that Parliament has a period of seventy days to deliberate on the draft finance bill. If Parliament fails to rule within this timeframe, the provisions of the bill may be put into effect by ordinance [[1]].
Interpreting “to Decide”
The debate surrounding Article 47 is likely to focus on the meaning of the expression “to decide”. One interpretation could be that Parliament could decide negatively, by rejecting the government’s budget. However, this interpretation does not align with the spirit of the Constitution. According to Article 39, Parliament is not permitted to present an alternative proposal to the government’s finance bill [[1]].
Government’s Exclusive Competence
The government has exclusive competence regarding the budget, and Parliament can only decide effectively by adopting the finance bill, either in its entirety or with amendments. Therefore, if Parliament were to reject the budget, it could not be said that it had decided within the meaning of Article 47.
Ensuring Financial Continuity
In the event of obstruction by Parliament, the government would be entitled to promulgate its draft finance bill by way of an ordinance, ensuring the financial continuity of the State. This provision has never been invoked in the history of the Fifth Republic, but it serves as a safety net to prevent budget crises.
The Role of the Cour des Comptes
In addition to Article 47, the Cour des Comptes plays a crucial role in monitoring Government action and assisting Parliament in this task, as stated in Article 47-2 of the Constitution [[2]][[3]].
France’s 1958 Constitution provides a solution to potential budget crises through Article 47, which ensures the financial continuity of the State. The provision has never been invoked, but it serves as a safety net to prevent budget debacles and guarantee the country’s financial stability.
References:
<a href="https://www.lemonde.fr/en/les-decodeurs/article/2023/02/06/french-parliament-explained-five-possible-outcomes-for-the-pension-reform60146068.html”>[1]
<a href="https://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/sites/default/files/as/root/bankmm/anglais/constiutionangl
