Emmanuel Macron wants to abolish theEna, the legendary Ecole nationale de l'Administration, commissioned by Charles De Gaulle in 1945, the forge of senior executives and of all the presidents of the French Republic from Valéry Giscard d'Estaing onwards. Only exceptions: François Mitterrand who, however, came from Sciences Po and Nicolas Sarkozy, yes, effectively, an outsider. Macron also wants to successfully end his mandate, achieve the objectives that led him to the Elysée, defend the construction of Europe.
And it is also for this reason that on 25 April he did not substantially change the strategic axis of his policy while granting the middle class some relief in terms of tax relief, more satisfactory minimum pensions and a more flexible and decentralized administrative reform. To understand the scope of this mid-term update, we talked to Linda Lanzillotta, a profound connoisseur of the French system, of his and our administration, former minister in the Prodi government and Pd vice president of the Senate in the past legislature.
With the European elections looming, the gilets jaunes protest still glowing and Marine Le Pen recovering in the polls, the French president wants to close ENA from which he himself comes. It almost seems like a paradox or isn't it? Is Macron giving a nod to populism or was the decision to start training the elite more distant and mature by now?
“ENA is the place where French top management has been trained for over sixty years: not only for public administration but also more generally for industry and finance. Originally it guaranteed that social mobility and those advanced training courses that all the deserving could access. Over the years, however, in the collective imagination it has become a sort of fence that guaranteed the self-reproduction of the "caste", distant from the needs of society undergoing complex changes.
I believe that Emmanuel Macron's choice therefore goes in two directions: on the one hand, that of dismantling the place-symbol of a ruling class considered insensitive to social suffering; on the other, however, it must be framed in the broader plan of reform of the public function and of the so-called "large bodies" of the State in a more decentralized key, more in contact with the territory. Rather, the problem is that this need to approach the demands of citizenship is affirmed but we do not yet know how this will happen. Such a large project might have needed more participation”.
Isn't that the risk of losing a factory of excellence?
“You don't have to be nostalgic. The issues raised by Emmanuel Macron are real: he has given guidelines that tend to disassemble positional annuities and has relaunched a role of managers that must be stimulated and tested, not guaranteed forever. Thinking about it, we have also tackled these issues in Italy, making public management more flexible also with forms of spoiler system. It is true that in Italy it is spoiler system It has not always served to recruit the best but if anything the most faithful, however even here we have reasoned on how to attribute the functions in relation to the skills demonstrated, how to introduce flexibility.
The difference is that we have operated without there being a common ground that would ensure quality, while in France the level of training is still very high. We will see if the transition, the decentralization, the replacement with a more open and widespread system on the territory will make it possible to maintain such a high level of quality, but the attempt to adapt to the new needs of the public administration to give citizens the answers they are waiting for is absolutely shareable. One of the channels identified by Macron is also the "one-stop shop" for the PA on a territorial basis".
The one-stop shop has also been announced several times in Italy without ever being implemented. And in France it would be a question of going from around 1300 offices to at least 4, one in each canton, with considerable expense. Doesn't it risk remaining a dream on paper? As for ENA, many have proposed to reform it, so far no one has managed to achieve concrete results…
“I remember the challenge of Nicolas Sarkozy who wanted to reform ENA precisely by leveraging his image as elected by the people. If we look at Macron, he certainly wants to send the signal that the message launched by the protests against a closed and self-referential ruling class has been received. If giving in to populism means giving a sign of real listening, this seems positive to me. Overall, the plan for the second part of the mandate focuses on a few pillars, one of which is the reform of the administration, a key point in the system of the ruling classes. Whether it will lead to a weakening of training I am not able to say at the moment".
The problem of the elites does not only concern France. What similarities or differences do you see with the Italian political situation?
“Politics in France is conceived as a profession that requires high qualifications and competence even if this "aristocracy" has not always managed to read the requests and needs that come from society. And this strikes us because there is actually a gap in preparation and knowledge between our countries regarding how the role of institutions is conceived in France. Not even the most agitated gilets jaunes could conceive of paths like those that brought people with the level of preparation of Luigi Di Maio to Parliament and to the government".
Macron used a particular expression, he spoke of republican elitism…
"It means that if we want to maintain the republican democratic system, we need to give everyone the opportunity to acquire skills. One is worth one but only at the start: we are very far from the moment we cross in Italy where competence becomes a negative value as you are part of an elite. Macron does not say at all that he wants to cancel training or that competence does not count. His is a difficult challenge, but if we want to maintain the democratic system, we must courageously reform the institutions, giving completely different answers from those given by Marine Le Pen, Matteo Salvini or Luigi Di Maio ”.
For example, how?
“We have just come out of an April 25 celebrated with conviction by all constitutional forces. But I repeat, we must not be just nostalgic and commemorative. And we cannot stand by and watch the progressive demolition of the representative system. I am thinking, for example, of the senseless proposal for a proactive referendum. Our model is going through an acute and serious moment that requires an evolution that responds to social evolution, otherwise there is nothing left but the authoritarian drift: the "democratic" Putin model that Trump would also like so much, held back by Congress. In France, Emmanuel Macron is trying to give new answers. Even in Italy you can find solutions that interpret social needs in a democratic way”.
His proposal?
"Instead of chasing after this useless flat tax, the tax wedge should be reduced, thus increasing the wages of the middle class, and businesses should be supported. To conclude and not lose the thread of the conversation, let's go back to Macron: he announced courageous reforms that take time. Unfortunately, he doesn't have much of it and risks finding himself in the middle of the ford when his mandate expires in 2022 ”.
