The negotiations between the PS and EELV on nuclear power are annoying. When you have convictions, you don't negotiate them, you defend them, you argue them, you build your own electoral base, you don't stand on the sidelines.
There are little things like this that go on under our noses and move nobody. We are 5 months away from the presidential election, 7 months away from the legislative elections, and for several days now the Socialist Party and Europe Ecologie-Les Verts have been quietly negotiating government posts and seats in parliament. And they're doing it all with total indifference and impunity, despite the fact that it's utterly and incredibly shocking.
Eva Joly explained, issuing ultimatums to the PS, that there would be no government agreement if the disagreement over nuclear power persisted. For his part, François Hollande explained that "government agreement and electoral agreement on the constituencies are linked", although he was not really worried by the Greens' current estimated electoral weight. The Socialist Party and the Greens would therefore be discussing ceding constituencies to each other, or in plainer language, giving each other space here and there. But what are they talking about? Has anyone won yet? Cede constituencies? ... But who has constituencies before the election? Who confiscates the electoral choice?
What would we say if supermarkets were to divide up catchment areas to benefit from exclusive territories, with Orange ceding such and such a town to SFR and SFR ceding such and such a town to Bouygues Telecom? What is the competition authority doing about the application of the free democratic process when it is so quick to denounce commercial agreements? The subject here is not so different.
But above all, what is Europe Ecologie-Les Verts and its candidate Eva Joly doing? This is an election campaign. As soon as a candidate, in the position of a competitor, negotiates after the match, not only does he shock public opinion, which abhors these petty political arrangements, but above all he loses credibility. When you're a candidate, you're a candidate through and through, running in your own lane.
So, Greens, if ecology is at the heart of your political project, if it's even an opportunity, as I believe it is, then defend your ideas, assume your convictions, really go for it, don't be subservient to the Socialist Party. When you have convictions, you don't negotiate them, you defend them, you argue them, you build your own electoral base, you don't stand on the sidelines. Stop following in the footsteps of the Socialist Party, or more exactly at its feet. Being against nuclear power is not a forbidden point of view, but we are living in times when being against it is not enough, when we must above all be "for" something, for alternatives, for other solutions. Revolt, indignation, criticism, why not, but proposing, innovating, revealing other possibilities, that's so much better, but so much more difficult.
What will make progress for the environment is not socialism, but a revisited market economy, new energy solutions, research and development, diplomatic and economic weight in international negotiations, getting out of nuclear power - why not - without massive recourse to coal and gas power stations during peak consumption periods, without creating energy inflation that intensifies the already rampant fuel poverty of many households, and so on.
Why does ecology have to be left-wing? As you know, the left does not have a monopoly on ecology ... but ecology is being monopolised by the left. By its attitude, EELV is positioning itself as the ecological cell of the Socialist Party. EELV is not a political party. Either EELV is a component of the Socialist Party, in which case they should join it and make ecology a structural component of the left and not something optional on the side. Either EELV is a political offer, a party in its own right, which defines its governance in terms of ecology, where ecology is not the last item on the agenda, but IS the agenda.
Eva Joly is not a presidential candidate, she is discussing and negotiating with potential future governments. By choosing not to choose, to be both confrontational and negotiating, we end up with these little pre-match deals that skew the democratic offer, by denying both her ideas and the electorate. Eva Joly should know better than anyone that these OM-VA-style pre-match deals are reprehensible!
By dint of being in tow, the Greens are politically in the doldrums. A turning point was undoubtedly missed after the European elections, when the party was to become a major political force, constructive but independent. And this rant is also a cry from the heart, to be heard as if we were talking to friends, well, to friendly convictions, shared well beyond Eva Joly's supporters, it's so obvious!
In fact, even the name of the movement has not yet been decided. Gathering is good, deciding is better. As Pierre Mendès France, an illustrious figure of the left, once said, "to govern is to choose". And when you reread this speech of 3 June 1953, from which this famous phrase comes, you'll see that he also talks a lot about "rigour" (in French in the text), a rigour "for which youth will be grateful"... Just goes to show that these words, ecology and rigour, are not meant to be partisan.