missile areas of tunisia, lots of portugal, some improvement by thursday, 15 degrees in has been ah, but i think in stories from african perspective, i'm the marine biologist and business when short documentary from african humane. i'm going to do that from south africa. ethiopia. and nigeria, we've been to go over some stuff in this class. she saw this as my name's my role africa direct on al jazeera, nationwide strikes in france of a pension reforms that's as parliament debates, whether to raise the retirement age. president mcdonald, his government, say the choices, reform, or bankruptcy, or other proposals, unfair to workers. this is inside story.

ah, hello, welcome to the program. i'm adrian said again a day off to francis national assembly started to debate an overhaul of pensions. workers walked off the job and took the streets and nationwide strikes. it's the 3rd time such major demonstrations have been held this year. the reforms were at the heart of president merrill microns reelection campaign last year. but approving deeply unpopular across the country. they include raising the retirement age from 62 to 64 years, and increasing the number of years that people must make contributions to receive a full state pension unit leaders say that all this is dangerous for democracy. but because part, he argues that it's balancing the system of the current age is dragging on public

finances. we'll get to our panel shortly. but 1st i'll just here is harry faucet, reports from paris for a 3rd week. now, a major national strike affecting all sorts of sectors in france, the transport network teachers are out on strike postal workers. and for the 1st time, farmers unions are also taking part in this national action. there are demonstrations in the works here in paris and in cities across the country. in the last 2 occasions, more than a 1000000 people took to the streets, opposed, of course, to president macros plans to raise the retirement age. from 62 to 64, there is, i think, a consensus in this country that something needs to be done to reform the pension system. president macros. finance minister says they'll be a 14000000000 euro hole in a national budget by 2030. if nothing is done to fix the problem, but there is real differences to what exactly to do about the opposition parties in the national assembly or arguing against it. they're trying to get it scrapped or

sent to a referendum. neither of those options are looking likely, but they're also proposing some $20000.00 amendment to the legislation during the course of this next month of debate trying to slow it, trying to make their arguments as public as possible against it for president macro . this is a real issue of his identity as a reformer. he wants to leave a legacy as to having a tackled this extremely difficult problem. and if he needs to, there is an option open to, to try to force it through no matter what the national assembly says. for others. though this is a real issue of national identity for france because people here really do value life overwork, they value the idea of having worked all their lives and then retiring with dignity and with time to enjoy that retirement. so this is a major issue, really disrupting life here in this country. harry faucet for inside story in paris . ah. so let's pray at our guests for today's discussion from paris were joined by remi boards roche. he is associate fellow at

the french institute of international and strategic affairs. paul taylor is contributing editor at politico. he joins us from st. remy, the province, and in london. we've got rainbow murray, who's professor of politics at queen mary university london. good to have all 3 of you. welcome to the program. that will start with you. been remy for the last decade electorates in most e u. countries of accepted a later retirement age, largely without protest. why is france different? do the unions and the public have the appetite to think for a long fight over this issue? well pension reform. so it's really something in france and debate. it's one of the last kinds of reforms and political discussions that really raised so much interest and passion. there's already been

a series of reforms about every 10 years in 109-323-2014 this year again. so there's a repetitive aspect to, to, to these reforms. the discussion is always a bit the same. and a lot of this reform is about accelerating the previous reform and also are raising the rich ryan retirement age by, by 2 years from 60 to 64. yes. but yes, there's a sense of contingency of repetition with this reforms at general lack of economy discussion about what is really a big, how big achieved and a lack of understanding of the broader economy. technological context, how much pensions are going to, to weigh on, not our workers in the future, depending on the path of productivity,

economic growth in general. so we have this very limited discussion with a lot of passion on all on all sides. and it's really, i think, relates to the lack of broader how economic discussion. and finally, you have these movements unions and also political parties, the top last and rather events in recent years in recent decades actually, which really sees on this opportunity to, to come back to, to, for and, and to be vocal on their side of the political equation. that, but really did i come back to that question to the public and the unions have to have the appetite for, for a long fight here. yes, i mean it, it's crucial on for, for the union said that they have their loss in political i way say 9 recent years. it's crucial for them to, to ringo coal. to be heard on this issue. and for the government as

well as they count. it's ready to go back because they've already postpone at reforms and this is really seen is key. it's not as essential if it's claimed to be economically at. the current system is not as imbalanced as is often said this been this series of reforms already, but i think the political messaging is, is extremely important on both sides for the governments and the unions. there isn't so much political opposition any more. i'm in doubt. hundreds and hundreds of amendments that are not proposed by opposition policies, but they're not that much key in the political discussion. simply the government wants to avoid having to pass the slower by force which, which is allowed by the french constitution. so they are trying to get some,

some more support, but they will have to, to, to, to pass the slow at some point. anyway, paul, he wrote a political that, but kron has staked his 2nd term and his reputation as an economic reform on raising the pension of age. the question has to be why, when it's so unpopular at least appears to be so unpopular with large sway it's of the electorate. well, you know, reform is historically unpopular in france and the french have a way of protesting about going through these a routine. if you like, almost a ritual of strikes and demonstrate demonstrations and then swallowing it and i think that's what the government is ultimately counting on to happen again. why? because all of emmanuel macros. presidents, if you life has been about trying to make friends a more modern, if you like a more investable country trying to get the economy growing faster and trying to

balance the books without having to cause the pain. now he hasn't managed to balance the books, but that's partly because of the cov it pandemic which is meant that nobody's been able to balance their books. and it's partly been because of the. ready war in ukraine, but nevertheless, you know, his key economic reforms have been to get more people into work to get unemployment down and to, to, to make work the center piece. and in this case, it's rather strange in a way that the french, they latch onto a symbol, they care more about symbols than they do about numbers. if you like, they prefer demagogy to demography. you know, when, when pensions, you know, when the retirement age was reduced to 60 by pulse, why meter all the great achievement of the left in the 1980s in those days. there were 4 active contributing workers for every one pensioner and the average age.

life expectancy was 74. well now today we have about $1.00 workers per pensioner. and the life expectancy has risen to 83. that's all very good. but somehow somewhere you have to find a way of balancing these things out and expecting people in the early sixties to work a bit longer minded french employers actually will employ them. and that's an important part which the government has has yet to properly address. and my view is to say, companies really have to step up to the plate stock or trying to get rid of seniors or in their fifties trying to get expensive old dogs that the allegedly can't learn new tricks off their payroll. and then putting them on to the public payroll on various benefits, disability or whatever, years before their actual retirement age. that's what needs to change. but,

but i think we're at the point of but how much of it, how much of this are to do with that, with my condo and, and his legacy. i remember saying that the pension system is not as in balanced as, as perhaps the, the politicians would have us believe that does he actually need to do it? well, it's currently is the pension. the counts are currently in a slight surplus, but predictably, you know, on the, on the, on a normal path, by 2030, there will be in deficit and that does, it will grow and then stabilize. so yes, the funding does need to be done about pensions in the medium term. ok. the question is this the right time? well, you know, michael tried a more ambitious pension or for a few years ago, and then he had to stop. i he abandoned that when, when coverage struck, but essentially he was in political difficulty at the time. so, you know, there's always, there's always a good argument for postponing any reform. but i think the front needs to grasp the

metal, the message, if my call were to be defeated, if france were unable to raise it a retirement age to 64, when most of europe is already at 656667. i think what again said that, that old message that france is just ungovernable, and i don't think that that would be to the countries advantage. professor murray raymer de, these reforms affect some sectors of society more than others are at. if so, is that fair? yes, this is one of the main claims made by the union, that these reforms do have a differential impact on different sectors of society. they are good that people from the upper middle classes you work in white collar jobs tend to be able to work for longer and to enjoy a longer time. and once they finish working,

whereas people who are in more physically taxing jobs, a lot of manual labor, a lot of working class professions are more physically taxing. and people find it difficult to work for as many years as people in less physically to mounting jobs. and they also tend to have a shorter time and g to low life expectancy. and so their argument is that this is a reform that has little or no consequence for people in cushy professions who were probably already working past the retirement age with little panel say where's the people who are struggling and desperately looking forward to their retirement. this is an extra 2 years that comes out of their life that they don't want to sacrifice . and so they say it's an unfair reform that's unfair to penalize is working close people. that's unfair, i suppose, to the younger generation who are carrying the growing booking and who have to pay for the retirement of the older generation. which has, you could argue acquire more wealth from the young could ever hope to acquire. yes

. is very much an aspect to generation to equality here. and as paul mentioned, there is a decreasing number of people working age, paying for people over time and age. and this is why retirement ages have been rising across europe because we have a growing number of people in retirement, age and categories, partly duty and growing life expectancy. and so if you don't perform this now, then that is a problem. generational inequality that will carry 3 poll. i'm a rather let me, let me put this question to you. president crohn has already had to make concessions to the union and his political opponents. will he do you think be forced to make further concessions? you said that, that it's inevitable. this is, this is going to happen whether people like it or not, but isn't going to have to make for the concessions, perhaps backed out entirely as, as jack she mark i had to do. or as we were hearing from,

from harry right at the beginning of the program, will he be able to force it through without a vote? well, forcing you to with auto, this is always an option and he can't really go back at this point because it's really one of his main reforms. i don't think it's that significant economically compared to other key economy, technological issues which are far less discussed. but that's really one reform that he has really put forward. it was really yes, a center piece and his and has manifesto. so he really has to, to move forward with it and how he will, he's certainly willing to, to do it by force. obviously, he is trying to, with his sub prime minister to find an and tentative solution are gaining more support for, for from the center. right, which has shrunk a lot in recent years in france,

the election after election. so where i really facing the challenge of a, a very, a limited political stage. also on this side, a union song, very little representative. and on all sides, people really are, are fighting for i was about say for survival. but let's say for political rather than in a, in a very challenging environment. so obviously the government has to, to really move forward with this reform on political grounds, even though it's not that essential a economy speaking compared to each other and damage all her issues for us. i saw you, but shaking your head and agreeing there on, on that at this point that micron has already had to make concessions to the hudy. and will you have to be able i think you probably have to make some or whether they're made to the unions or more likely to the conservative living in the

opposition party, which is as always a call or a later retirement age. and therefore can hardly vote against it now, but, but they're holding out for more concession so that they can show that they, they want some social a socially for changes. and i think yes, there are a couple of changes. ready he's already, they've already sort of conceded that people who start work under the age of 21 shouldn't have to work until 64 if they've, if they've got their full contribution. so that 43 years of contributions, they'll need from 2027. then they should be able to retire. there are other concessions that can be made and where they've already made some amendments for women. one thing which i think is a big thing and they may concede late on the line till the treasury is still resisting it. is the question that they've, they've put out this headline number and said the minimum pension from now on will

be $1200.00 euros a month, which would be quite a significant boost about a $200.00 euro boost for the poorest pensioners. and the question is, is that $1200.00 net of tax or is it $1200.00? but then they take off a social deduction. and so that still something that's in play and they may have to make a concession that the issue about forcing it through. i mean, there is a french legal provision that they can call a vote of confidence essentially. and they invoke this article of the constitution and the law is due to a past unless the opposition manages to find a majority to overthrow the government. this is a minority government, it doesn't have a majority of its own, therefore it needs extra votes or extra extensions to pass law. so it's a possibility that the government could be top will be very unlikely and it would require all of the opposition forces who ate each other almost as much as they hate

mr. michael to to come together. more likely is they will be able to get all or most of it could be can to vote for this bill with one or 2 more changes. the cutoff date in parliament under the procedure for the final vote is the 26th of march. so between now and the 26th of march, i think the government will, has some concessions up its sleeve, which it will eat out a key moments as it sees the number of strike is going down. the number of demonstrations going down. one thing that you are hearing today at today's the 3rd big protest day and strike day. and the number of strikers in the number of st demonstrators appear to be slightly down, but it's by no means over. it's during a school holiday period. so there may be a few people because of that. and so, but one thing that you are hearing from the more radical trade union is told of an all out strike that would be open ended and could be extended every day.

and that is something which obviously would cause serious damage over time to the economy. and particularly if they were to do things like blocking refineries to prevent petrol, getting to gas stations and things like that. on the other hand, that might well. ready split, united union movement, which is there at the moment in the streets, protesting against this bill. because i don't think all of the unions will agree to an open ended general strike. so i, it, my political judgement, the union, although they have justice on their side in some of the points which, which rainbow mentioned. you know that there are there on a losing track and they need to also work out what they can settle for or what they you know, at what point they call it quits. ok? reba pension anita. 16 percent. very nearly of gdp compared to the new average of 13.6. and just over $12.00 in germany or the opposition parties argue that the way

to fund earlier retirement is to make employers pay more through taxes. and that, of course, in a country that has the highest tax take in, in europe after a germany is that a realistic solution? are there other alternatives here? and if not, why not? if this occurred rather speak to the critic respect because i'm a consultant is not an economist. so i would rather respond to some of the claims about the feasibility pushing this through. it was mentioned earlier that the government might try to run the legislation through using the bypass the parliament . i think even though they do have the option of doing that, i think it's very unlikely that they will. they have done this repeatedly for the budget reforms that they've done throughout the autumn legislative period. and the nature of this poly mentary override is that they are allowed to do it unlimited

times. the budget reforms, which is a big part of the legislative agenda. but after that, they can only get one more time in a parliamentary session. so they would be using the last bullet and the gun if you will. but i think this is a politically sensitive issue, and they've made it very clear that they don't want to go down the path that they want to get a legislative consensus. so i think it is much more likely that they're going to try to go down the route of, of working with other political parties. but the republicans are aware of the fact that on the one hand, this is very much something that they have been promoting furnace time. but at the same time, it's also an issue that isn't very popular in terms of public opinion or the public opinion poll coming outside the majority of the countries against this. so they are going to be a bit wary, i think as propping up a minority government on something my cited stand. again, let's put the question to to, to remy, then all that viable alternatives to later retirement?

is that something that the government is missing? here is the opposition, right? why increasing the contribution, as you mentioned, for employers are a current workers is, is an option, but the opposite is it's rather on the table trying to, to read the lesson this disparate on which is already too high. so it's not really a discourse thought just them in, and you just see a few amendments that are proposed in that direction. but that's not taken really seriously. but really considering the outlook for the this bud and the burden of pensions and terms of g d, p. and it's actually expected to, to drop them to align with other european countries. as a result of previous reforms, we've had already 3 rather major reforms over the past 30 years now. and this one

is not such a major reform and the, and it's, it's more of an acceleration of rigorous reforms as far as the the, the contribution time is concerned and adjusting the age of retirements. but the main adjustments have already been made to, to lower the button on, on, on active workers, the bad enough funding for pensions. and the, the thing is also as you have a very, disrupted a job market, a very, very, an evil, very unequal as was mentioned before. lots of people who all ha, below the age of a time. and i have actually no option to, to go back to work when they are a 3rd, and a lot of people at any age, whether educated or not. of course, at fx less indicated we have more have very difficult access to the job market and

cannot truly expect to contribute to the system and i will the left side of it at the end of their, of their career. so i think the issue of economy crisis and we've been facing economy crisis after economic crisis and recent years cannot be highly dismissed. it's not just a matter of our fiscal, our metric in the end. and you can take it considered different european countries, which would implement exactly the same reforms. but if in the end it have very different growth and path and productivity, especially the outcome will be very different ratings of the balance of the pension system. i'm sorry to interrupt you time time is rapidly running out here. i want to get one more question info for pull. how much money will raising the retirement age save? is it going to plug that the deficit in french pension funding,

and would it save enough money for france to spend it other areas, for instance, defense, given the amount of money the country is currently spending on on assistance with for ukraine? well, that's not the intention of this reform. the intention is that the proposal will generate 18000000000 euros in savings by 2030. but that doesn't help with current defense spending or with age for ukraine. and almost a 3rd, in fact, much more than the 3rd. by the time they've made more concessions, of those savings will be redistributed to various different forms of disadvantage groups. people doing physically wearing things exciting things that the rainbow was talking about, the working class, people who do heavy labor and who need to retire early. i think a big so i come back to this point that we france it. not just because of

its bulkiness, it's also an exception because so few older people are in work. and that's something the country needs to address. this government is starting on that, but in a very kind of timid way, they want to introduce an index of senior employment as they call it so. so, so sort of name and shame that companies that don't employ enough seniors and the companies are screaming blue murder saying we don't want to be forced to, to employ more. your quote is all people. and so, but if you look at how germany in the nordic countries handle this, that they're much better at using older. ready workers as mentors, as people with experienced teaching, younger people, partnering, apprentices, partnering notice workers and so in trans needs to start doing that. yeah. of course know in the minds of people demonstrating today. of course, i'm sorry we're going to have to read it that we are out of time. thank you. all

right, me bushel. paul taylor and rainbow marie for being with us today. and thank you for watching. don't forget you can see the program again at any time. just by going to the website, you'll find that out a 0. com for further discussion. go to our facebook page, she'll find that at facebook dot com forward slash ha inside story. and of course, this conversation will continue on twitter handle at ha, inside story from me, adrian finnegan on the team here. and thanks for being with us will see you again. bye for now. ah ah.

examining the intent of today's headlines. this is what is the one about ensuring that learning center can continue. let count on that and setting the agenda for tomorrow's discussions. i don't believe that i think in a society that is willing to kill international filmmakers and world class journalists, bring programs to inform. and inspire you, we need to have a media ensuring that like to the hood on al jazeera oil companies, the biggest companies in the world had a very deep understanding of the climate crisis before the rest of us. and yet they did not tell anyone else. that's where the crimes 40 years of denying their own scientific evidence. i thought that i could important them to change their business plan. this was very naive of decisions that have plagued our future. it's just pure evil. i don't know what to say. big oil's big lies on

a jessina. this is one of the most astounding technological revolutions in all of history make our planet great. we have to meet the seo tool emission targets lecture casa major mitchum in motion. many to be mindful where people are just talking about wind and solar sake that's going to solve the problem. it won't. the world of business in commerce is driving energy transition each the promise of clean energy and illusion. the top side of green energy on al jazeera ah, of rice to fund survive isn't takia, and syria, as the number of people did from monday's earthquakes, crosses 8600. ah.