Sarkozy’s Mandate
Filed under: Crime, Europe, France, Immigration, Integration, Sarkozy, Unemployment, Work — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on May 7, 2007 @ 7:50 am CEST
Charles Bremner wrote a good article about Sarkozy’s victory in France. Sarkozy himself described the victory as “a mandate for a moral renaissance and radical reform of the over-regulated welfare state.” He said: “Together we are going to write a new page of history. The page, I am sure, will be great and it will be beautiful.” His agenda:
“The French have chosen to break with the ideas, habits and behaviour of the past,” he said. “I will restore the value of work, authority, merit and respect for the nation.”
He would also rid France of its habit of “repenting” for its past historical sins. “This repentance is a form of self-hatred,” he said.
Mr Sarkozy offered friendship to the United States, but urged Washington to act urgently on climate change. He also warned fellow European leaders that he expected them to join him in making the Union more protective.
As reader LThomas pointed out in one of the comment sections yesterday, France and Germany have now both elected relatively pro-American people into office; in Germany Christian Democrat Angela Merkel; in France, Nicolas Sarkozy. Europe moving to the right? I certainly hope so and to a degree I think so. The main causes: immigration and problems with the welfare state. Moral decline is an important factor as well; many people, like yours truly, are greatly worried about this.
Back to Sarkozy: he will have to keep his word. France needs reforms. He has to reform the welfare state, something needs to be done about the high unemployment rate (less regulation is one of the ways to achieve that; so are tax cuts), he has to be tough re. immigration, same goes for riots and crime, the French have to start working (more hours) again: they have to demand a little less and achieve a bit more and they have to do something about, yes, moral decline.
Protests if not riots are to be expected the coming weeks, months and perhaps even years; so be it. Reforms always hurt in the short term.
All will hang on how Sarkozy will deal with protests, strikes and riots. Thatcher went through that process, she refused to give in and, in the end, became one of the best modern PM’s of Britain.
Hopefully Sarkozy will be able to do the same.
1 Alan
May 7, 2007 @ 1:52 pm CESTWhile there may be many deficiencies in France’s economy, one thing to note:
Their per-hour productivity is the highest in the developed world (tied with Belgium). The US has the highest per-worker productivity, but that’s because of long hours (no need to discuss the problems with that).
2 domajot
May 7, 2007 @ 4:19 pm CESTThe mandate business has never been clear to me. As I understand it, Sarkozy got around 54% of the vote. When does a mandate begin, at 51%?
I honestly don’t know.
3 C Stanley
May 7, 2007 @ 4:32 pm CESTDoma,
Generally I think that if it’s a politician one agrees with, one tends to say that the mandate comes with 51% of vote while if one disagrees, one thinks that anything short of 99% isn’t a clear mandate.
But the more honest definitions, I think, include not only percentages of vote but overall numbers of vote (high turnout being an indicator of depth of support), and whether or not the conventional wisdom would have had the person winning. In other words, if the environment would tend to favor the other candidate (because of incumbency, or being the candidate whose supporters have deep pockets, etc) then even a 51% showing is very good.
4 yonason
May 7, 2007 @ 8:22 pm CESTDON’T WORRY
Sarkozy is ‘on it’, . . . in six months, . . . maybe.
5 Black Shards, In Your Eyes, Blinding » Pro-America Europe?
May 8, 2007 @ 12:35 am CEST[…] van deer Galien says that Sarkozy has to be tough on immigration and worker-oriented reforms; i.e., de-socialize France. Good […]
6 lthomas
May 9, 2007 @ 2:21 pm CESTThere is NEVER a mandate. The last resemblance of a mandate I saw was Reagans trouncing of Carter and Dukakis or LBJ’s trouncing of the back and forth, up and down, right and left Barry Goldwater.
A Leader LEADS all the people. He is there for everyone. But first and foremost he is there to protect and defend the country that has elected him to be their leader.
Once Politicians and PARTIES realize that their is more then ONE side then perhaps we can have some MODERATION.
Until then A mandate seems to start with the person swearing in. WRONG…But there you have it.
Bush’s MAIN attribute that people loved about him was that once he made a decision he did not flip flop or change his mind. People polled that as his greatest attribute. Now the antiwar is screaming at him for not being willing to change his mind when that is what the people used to tell him they loved about him the most.
Must be hard to be a leader.