Robert Badinter is Expressed on the position of the Socialists about revising constitutional. There is nothing to change ... "Some wonder whether, by Refusing to vote the constitutional amendment of hen party dares , the Socialists are not going to miss an opportunity. Rebalance institutions The answer is no. This revision is a lost opportunity, not for the Socialists, for the purpose Republic Our institutions Suffer from a Profound evil. Hyperpower President is the real head of the government, if not the government alone. the current practice of the Elysee. and since the five-year and the succession of presidential and legislative elections, it is the real head of the presidential majorité in the Assembly. the separation of powers is not appearance. in Moreover , this power is subject only to-any liability I call this diet monocracy .. the power of one in the Republic HOWEVER, the Proposed revision Does not Reduce the president's powers It Increases em. ALLOWING _him_ to talk directly to Parliamentarians in Congress. The President will present a flattering picture of ict work and will cheer for His majority His government program. The Minister Prime as head of the parliamentary majority Disappears. The Strengthening of Parliament's prerogatives, the objective first of the review by the president, is a sham in terms of real power. As the president will be the undisputed leader of the majority in the Assembly hen party dares, the Palais Bourbon REMAIN year annex of the Elysee Palace. "Cy wants the King, cy is the law," the axiom of the old diet still the rule under the Fifth Republic. As for the nomination of presidential powers to the functions (Constitutional Council, CSA, etc.) is announced "substantial change". the choice of the president May be refused by a vote of three-fifths of the members of a parliamentary committee Purpose Such a vote requires the holder of the presidential majority, That will never be Given Against the will of the President. If we wanted to make thesis appointments consensus Would require a positive three-fifths majority Requiring the agreement of the opposition. We are far short. Others argued That reform grants the parliamentary opposition New Rights. Goal we must look at the scope of the texts and not just the label . We are Told: Parliament will control half of the agenda, "a huge step forward." Aim what about the opposition? The project reserves a day for three weeks to share with the centrists. Beautiful democratic progress cambridge hen party ! Another example. the Chair announced that the chair of a parliamentary commission of eight will be reserved for the opposition. Why not three? We do not ask for tips, goal rebalancing. Finally, the Proposed revision consolidates the operating archaic election of Senators who Ensures the right to a permanent majority in the Senate. This location is a challenge to democracy. The Balladur committee hAD opened the way for a potential foreign exchange. The Senate refused everything right about it. It intends to retain control of the Senate, and THUS, any constitutional amendment Proposed by the left. in the next rotation, the left will-have to present a draft constitutional amendment Submitted directly to the country in a referendum. It shoulds include recognition of the right to vote in municipal elections Regularly Established immigrants in France. This reform is so significant for integration, is ignored by the current review. Under terms thesis, free to anyone Who will dance the pas de deux with the constitutional president. That is not our choice. "