Quick Summary
- 1High-commissaire au Plan Clément Beaune and constitutionnaliste Benjamin Morel propose a major reform of the French budgetary procedure.
- 2The central idea is to merge the main budget law (PLF) and the social security financing law (PLFSS) into a single annual text.
- 3They also advocate for a multi-year budgetary law and the suppression of Article 40 of the Constitution.
- 4The reform aims to address the procedural limitations currently hindering effective fiscal management.
A Call for Modernization
The architects of French public policy are signaling a critical need for structural change. In a significant intervention, Clément Beaune and Benjamin Morel have outlined a comprehensive vision to overhaul the nation's budgetary process, arguing that the existing framework is no longer fit for purpose. Their proposal targets the very core of how France manages its public finances, from legislative procedure to long-term planning.
Their joint effort highlights a growing consensus that the current system, with its rigid timelines and fragmented laws, creates inefficiencies and limits strategic foresight. By proposing a series of bold reforms, they aim to inject flexibility and coherence into a process that has long been criticized for its complexity.
The Core Proposals
The reform package is built on three foundational pillars designed to streamline and modernize fiscal governance. The most prominent suggestion is the fusion of the PLF and the PLFSS. Currently, these two major pieces of legislation—the annual budget law and the social security financing law—are debated separately, creating a disjointed and often contradictory legislative cycle. Merging them would create a single, unified text covering all state and social finances.
In addition to this merger, Beaune and Morel advocate for the introduction of a loi pluriannuelle, or multi-year budgetary law. This would allow for strategic planning that extends beyond the single-year cycle, providing greater stability and predictability for public services and investment programs. The third, and perhaps most radical, element of their plan is the suppression of Article 40 of the Constitution. This article currently prevents parliamentarians from proposing amendments that increase public expenditure, a restriction the authors believe stifles democratic debate and fiscal innovation.
"La procédure budgétaire montre ses limites, nous devons la faire évoluer."— Clément Beaune and Benjamin Morel
Addressing Systemic Flaws
The driving force behind this initiative is the recognition that the current budgetary procedure montre ses limites—it shows its limits. The existing system is often described as a 'budgetary straightjacket,' forcing the government to make critical decisions within a narrow, annual window. This short-term focus can lead to reactive policymaking rather than proactive, strategic investment. The separation of the PLF and PLFSS further complicates this, as decisions made in one sphere can have unforeseen and negative consequences in the other.
La procédure budgétaire montre ses limites, nous devons la faire évoluer.
By removing the constraints of Article 40, the reform would empower the legislature to play a more dynamic role in shaping fiscal policy. This shift could lead to a more responsive and representative budget, one that better reflects the priorities of the elected assembly. The combination of a unified annual budget with a multi-year strategic framework would create a system that is both agile and forward-looking, capable of responding to immediate needs while adhering to a coherent long-term vision.
Implications for Governance
Should these proposals be adopted, the impact on French governance would be profound. A single, comprehensive budgetary text would simplify the legislative process, making it more transparent and accessible to the public. It would force a holistic view of public spending, encouraging a more integrated approach to economic and social policy. The move towards a multi-year framework would also signal a significant shift in political culture, from short-term electoral cycles to long-term national development goals.
The potential abolition of Article 40 represents a fundamental rebalancing of power between the executive and legislative branches. It would grant deputies and senators greater agency in fiscal matters, transforming them from passive reviewers of the government's budget into active co-authors of the nation's financial roadmap. This could foster a more robust and creative debate around public spending priorities and revenue generation.
A New Fiscal Horizon
The proposal from Clément Beaune and Benjamin Morel is more than a technical adjustment; it is a blueprint for a new era of French fiscal management. It directly confronts the procedural weaknesses that have hampered effective governance and offers a clear, structured path toward a more modern system. The core takeaway is that evolution is not just possible, but necessary to meet the complex challenges of the 21st century.
As the debate begins, the focus will be on the political will to undertake such a significant constitutional and legislative overhaul. The vision presented offers a compelling alternative to the status quo, promising a budgetary process that is more coherent, strategic, and democratic. The coming months will determine if France is ready to take this decisive step toward a more resilient fiscal future.
Frequently Asked Questions
The proposals are put forward by Clément Beaune, the High-commissaire au Plan, and Benjamin Morel, a constitutionalist. They have collaborated on a vision to reform the nation's fiscal governance.
The primary goal is to modernize the budgetary process by addressing its current limitations. The reform seeks to create a more integrated, flexible, and strategic system for managing public finances.
The key recommendations include merging the annual budget law (PLF) and the social security law (PLFSS) into a single text, introducing a multi-year budgetary law, and suppressing Article 40 of the Constitution to allow for more parliamentary input on spending.
The existing procedure is seen as rigid and fragmented, forcing short-term decision-making. The separation of key financial laws and constitutional restrictions on parliamentary amendments are viewed as obstacles to effective, long-term fiscal planning.
