Jordan Bardella participated in a debate on TF1 where he aimed to present himself as a man ready to exercise power but instead highlighted the significant flaws and contradictions in the Rassemblement National (RN) program. The debate was technical but did delve into the core of the projects and their viability. Bardella was frequently challenged by his opponents on the simplistic nature of RN’s measures. The debate covered issues like immigration policy, VAT reduction on fuel, and the financial implications of the RN’s proposals.
Bardella’s promise to tighten immigration policy calmly through legislation was questioned, particularly regarding the constitutionality of abolishing jus soli. The RN plans to introduce jus soli through emergency immigration bills followed by a referendum to revise the Constitution, though recent decisions by the Constitutional Council raise doubts about the feasibility of these measures. This includes the rejection of a referendum by Les Républicains on immigration, which aimed to pass measures like conditioning access to social benefits for immigrants to five years of residence.
The debate also covered the reduction of VAT on fuel, a key measure in Bardella’s program. However, EU law restricts reducing VAT on fuels below 15%, making it challenging to implement Bardella’s proposed reduction to 5.5%. There were discussions on the financial implications of RN’s proposals, with opponents highlighting potential increases in public expenditure and the need for revenue to fund these measures.
Bardella’s commitment to not increase taxes and ensure fiscal peace was questioned, given the cost of measures like VAT reduction and pension reform proposed by RN. The Bourges Institute estimated that the RN’s proposal on VAT reduction could cost up to 11.3 billion euros, while pension reforms could add up to 27.4 billion euros. Like RN, other parties had expensive programs, but the left-wing coalition proposed additional taxes on the wealthiest households and businesses to finance their measures.
The debate also touched on the proposal for minimum sentences for young offenders, a measure that has been tested in the past and found to have limited effectiveness. Peines plancher introduced in 2007 were eliminated in 2014 due to concerns about their efficacy and impact on recidivism rates. The discussion highlighted how minimum sentences had not been a deterrent in the short term, only reducing repeat offenses by a small margin.
Lastly, Bardella was pressed on a party member’s connections to Russia, raising concerns about foreign interference despite the RN’s stance against it. The focus on Tamara Volokhova, an advisor within the RN with ties to Russia, highlighted the need for transparency in party affiliations, especially for a party that claims to be against foreign influence. The discussion on Volokhova underscored the importance of clarity and accountability in political affiliations.
