From the "normal President", as he liked to call himself during the electoral campaign, in contrast to the excesses of Sarkozysm, to "Monsieur Faible" (Mr. Weak), the current label of the French media, the transition was rapid, very rapid. François Hollande, elected to lead France on May 5, 2012, fell to 24% of the vote in one year, the lowest record ever recorded by a French president at the same time in his mandate.
How could this happen? Hollande can put forward some justification, excuse or the like: first of all the economic crisis, which inevitably also affected France. Although the situation remains better than in Italy and Spain, the recession is now upon us. Deindustrialization, the country's endemic evil, is accelerating. And unemployment has already leapt above 11%, to Italian levels. On achieving the objective of 3% of the public deficit compared to GDP, Paris took two more years to reach the objective (it was foreseen at the end of 2013), because from this point of view the French situation is at risk (the figure it was 4,7% at the end of last year), much worse than in Italy. Hollande could also point out that precisely this burden on the state coffers is the legacy of the previous management, of a Nicolas Sarkozy who, to buffer the crisis, spent without restraint.
But all this is not enough to explain the meltdown of "Monsieur Faible" in the polls. Hollande has disappointed the expectations of many of his constituents (and numerous international observers) regarding a new policy aimed at growth. That was his main promise at the beginning. And he was one of the first to say that it was necessary to fight that battle against Merkel's policy of austerity at any cost. Since then, however, his words have not been followed by deeds. Hollande failed to pass a European budget (the one for 2014-2020) up to the situation (indeed, for the first time in the history of a united Europe, he will register a decrease compared to the previous one). Apart from the postponement for his own country of the objective of 3% of the public deficit on GDP, the French President has not been able to promote a change in the policy of the Maastricht parameters which grips all of Europe, except Germany. He failed to go further.
In a certain sense it is the synthesis of the impasse of the entire European left, which remains hostage to the Keynesian recipe for increasing public spending to overcome the crisis. But in a context in which we act within the tight budgetary limits imposed by Europe and the euro, that policy is unfeasible. We end up navigating confusedly along a series of contradictions. Like when Hollande, shortly after his arrival at the Elysée, annulled one of Sarkzoy's last measures, the one on social VAT, which was to lead to the reduction of social security contributions for businesses through the increase in VAT (by charging all citizens). To then, however, a few months later launch a package of tax credits always for the benefit of entrepreneurs of 20 billion euros, financed by taxpayers, roughly the same amount that would have come to them with the social VAT.
Between one blow to the rim and one to the barrel, the strategy that characterized Hollande's first year, the President, to tell the truth, nonetheless fulfilled many of the promises made during the electoral campaign (60 in all), such as the authorization marriage and adoption by gays, the cut of 30% of his salary and that of ministers. In addition to the enhancement of public schools (6.700 new teachers were hired last year and over 10 since the beginning of the year), without considering the take-off of the public investment bank (Bpi) for small and medium-sized enterprises, with 40 billion euros.
Fiscal policy has also been reoriented towards greater social justice. The problem is that he expected something more. A more general and European response to the current crisis. An example also for the left of other countries. There is still hope.
