Between social emergency and climate emergency, the executive faces a dangerous arbitration. In his letter to the French sent on January 13, Emmanuel Macron expressed the wish that the great debate would allow "Make angry an opportunity". But can one respond at the same time to the exasperation of yellow vests and the anguish of those who do not resign themselves to seeing the end of the world arrive? Chance of the calendar, the end of the big debate, mid-March, will coincide with new markets for the climate which announce themselves massive. What will make the dilemma of the government even more visible in the weeks to come. Two months after the abandonment of the carbon tax, parliamentarians and ministers reiterate their commitment to ecological taxation. To change behaviors, the "Price signal" remains the right tool, ensures the Secretary of State Brune Poirson, relaying the almost unanimous opinion of all the ecologists. A "Stupidity" even a "Political fault", strangled some of his colleagues, frightened that this gives the yellow vests an additional reason to remain mobilized after thirteen Saturdays demonstrations.
Read alsoGreen taxation: the majority recarbure on carbon
In front of the Council of Ministers on Wednesday, the Head of State apparently gave reason to the latter, saying that his goal for the five-year period was still to lower taxes and that there was no question of responding to anger. by an increase in taxation. Close the ban? Not quite: if Emmanuel Macron advocates a global decrease in compulsory levies, nothing prevents in theory to increase some and reduce others. In his letter to the French, the President had himself put the subject on the table: the ecological transition, "How do we finance it? By the tax? By taxes? And who should be concerned in priority? " Two days later, the Minister of Ecological Transition, François de Rugy, asked himself the same question: "This is not to say that we will resume the carbon tax as we had known so far." For him, it was necessary to discuss "level" and "Rhythm" of this green taxation, while ensuring that "The money raised really serves the ecological transition".
Read alsoExecutive: pesticides, climate … the reverse of the green speech
In the government and in the Assembly, the macronistes of ecological sensitivity do not see in the name of which they would be forbidden to think in full national debate. Some remind, in passing, that the tenants of Bercy did not shy away, they, to put their own "Work tracks" on the table: Bruno Le Maire suggested taxing the capital gains of second homes when Gérald Darmanin wanted to cut into the tax loopholes. Double presidential veto. We even saw the highly disciplined Jean-Yves Le Drian oppose the organization of a referendum in May, the day of the European, while the Elysee maintains that it is still under study …
After the resignation of Nicolas Hulot and the departure of the parliamentary group LREM from his lieutenant Matthieu Orphelin, it is little to say that the credibility of Macron in the field of ecology has deteriorated at a time when controversies are swelling, especially on the glyphosate. At the risk of arousing anger against the carbon tax, some in the majority want to believe that this widening gap can still be filled, bringing forward other ideas. Why not also tax kerosene on planes? Remove from the calculation of deficits in the EU investments in favor of the ecological transition? What extend the big debate during the campaign for the European.