Laurent Jacobelli announced that he would “very probably” table a motion of censure if the government uses 49.3 to have the 2027 budget adopted without debate.
Speaking on the show Les 4 Vérités on France 2 on Wednesday June 17, Laurent Jacobelli replied “Very probably” to the question “Will you censor if there is 49.3?”. The RN deputy for Moselle, spokesperson for the party, described the executive as a “government at the end of its life” and anticipated the absence of parliamentary debate on the 2027 budget.
Institutional reminder: article 49.3
Article 49.3 of the Constitution allows the government to “adopt a text without a vote” in the National Assembly. Frequently used for finance laws, it exposes the executive to the filing of motions of censure whose adoption leads to the fall of the government; failing this, the text is deemed adopted.
Laurent Jacobelli judged that the government “is incapable of making the right budgetary decisions for the French”, while “taxes, the fiscal burden, are increasing and employment and growth are stagnating, or even declining”. Asked about the “massive blow from the Bank of France” evoking “almost zero growth this year”, he considered that it was necessary “to find a well-managed, balanced budget”.
On purchasing power, he defended “lowering the weight of VAT on gasoline, dropping it from 20% to 5.5%”, estimating that “the French pay between 1.90 euros and 2 euros per liter of gasoline” and that “the State is getting fatter with its taxes”. He also argued that “justice must be a priority area of investment”, that “immigration must stop weighing down public finances” and that we must “philosophically review the structure of the budget”.
Regarding Donald Trump’s state dinner at Versailles, he considered that “there are relations to maintain” with the United States and that it was better to favor “a direct dialogue between the President of the French Republic and the President of the United States”, “better than giving the keys to Madame von der Leyen, who leads a policy which is sometimes not to the advantage of France”.
Criminal justice and the death penalty
On justice and sexual violence, he considered that it was necessary to “roughly double the number of magistrates” and placed “real and incompressible life imprisonment” at the heart of his conception of the National Rally, while saying he was “against the death penalty”. Evoking the idea of a referendum on this subject, he clarified that “it is not constitutional today” and that his response was based on a hypothesis of a citizen-initiated referendum. He denounced a judicial “philosophy” which “excuses the guilty” and called for “severely punishing the guilty”, putting “the victim at the center”.
