French President Jacques Chirac's re-election brought a sigh of relief across France and around the world. But the scare Jean-Marie Le Pen gave French politics will be for nought if Britain's political class slips back into its old hauteur and complacency.
France has always been a nation of sharp divisions. Once its divide marked the chasm between the Left and the Right. Today it marks the economy's division between its public and private sectors. Prime Minister Lionel Jospin, who was humiliated by Le Pen, had presided over a strong economy, with many new jobs created, more leisure time following the introduction of the 35-hour week, and some liberal reforms such as privatization on a scale hitherto unseen in France.
But despite all that, unemployment remained stubbornly high and a pervasive insecurity had set in. Jospin's program failed to vanquish these ills primarily because France is divided between a large public sector and a dynamic private sector, much of which is being driven outside the country because of high taxation and endless bureaucracy. Businesses that remain must bear the costs France's leviathan public sector.
That France has experienced high unemployment for over two decades is a clear sign that economic policy is amiss. French unemployed are well off compared to their counterparts abroad, but the system is costly and inefficient. Social benefits, for example, are paid only for a limited amount of time; they are then replaced by a minimum-living allowance, which represents an exclusion from society.
In August 1945, Jean Monnet told Charles de Gaulle: "You speak of grandeur, but the French are small today. There will only be grandeur when the French assume a status that justifies grandeur ... There must be more production, more productivity; [we] must transform the country from a material point of view."
The general did not need convincing. He believed that the state had an "ardent obligation" to engage in economic planning. One of Monnet's first actions was to declare that modernization could not be attained while the French worked such short hours; a 45-hour working week was the minimum that was necessary. The French put in an average of 46 hours per week through the early 1960s. Since then, work-time has steadily declined. A 32-hour work week is now deemed something worth striking for.
Monnet's effort to rebuild France by mobilizing business, unions and government authorities at all levels mutated into the "Great Organizational Myth" -- that technocrats can allocate resources better than the market. French central planning attempted to blaze a new path between communist centralization and Vichy corporatism. Five decades on, the wheels of state are still mostly spinning in that muddy middle ground.
The French state employs around 5 million people -- nearly one-fourth of the working population, including at the local level. The salaries and pensions of these people represent about 40 percent of the national budget. This trend is completely opposite that prevailing in other sectors. For example, the number of farmers fell steadily over the past three decades, yet the number of Ministry of Agriculture bureaucrats has doubled.
Compare that bloat with the French private sector. EU single-market provisions have forced French companies to compete without the crutch of traditional protectionist measures and state subsidies. The best companies have cut costs ferociously, improving productivity and expanding production abroad. Cosmetic giant L'Oreal, food maker Danone, tire-maker Michelin and tour-operator Club Mediterranee are but a few of the highly competitive companies that are more global than French. Their achievements demonstrate the strength of the external side of the economy, which is the main engine of French growth.
But "private France" cannot continue to compete and innovate while carrying the dead weight of "public France" on its shoulders. Many ill-managed public or semi-public enterprises only survive because they are saturated by state subsidies. The private sector's burden is not limited to state enterprises, but stems more generally from the vast share of national income (51 percent) that the state taxes and spends, with a large part of taxation falling on employment. Additional obstacles include a lack of labor flexibility, especially legal barriers to shedding labor.
The more immediate explanation for the lack of reforms derives from the paradox of the strength of the French economy. The situation is not bad enough to incite de-mands for serious reform. Indeed, high living standards and high social expectations make it political suicide for any party or leader to propose even the short-term sacrifices serious reform will entail. So the strength of the French private sector has created the material basis for a welfare state that is truly parasitical: it weakens its host (the private sector) without killing it.
Europe was thought by the French political class to be the solution. But Europe and the euro are increasingly catalysts for public resentment. Jospin and Chirac have done nothing to implement the large liberalization program agreed among EU members in Lisbon two years ago, which means that the benefits of liberalization are denied France at a time when the public perceives the EU as imposing all sorts of restrictions on the French way of doing business.
It is time for France to abandon the indulgence of French exceptionalism and start serious reforms that engage the French electorate. The shame of Le Pen's newfound prominence may yet prove beneficial if it forces the mainstream political establishment to heed popular concerns and address the country's problems.
Brigitte Granville is head of the international economics program at the Royal Institute for International Affairs, London. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RIIA. Copyright: Project Syndicate
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US