For equality and solidarity

The recent industrial action and the demonstrations in France are part of a campaign against the Chirac government's plans to cut welfare benefits and impose a tax under the pretext of trying to reduce France's Social Security deficit. Among the areas that would be affected are the public health system, family allowance benefits and pensions. Despite the Chirac government's attempts to justify the intended changes, it is quite clear that the "restructuring" of social security is part of the current capitalist governments' trend of selling off public services to the private sector, as well as transferring more public funds to the rich. A good indication of this is the French government's intention to privatise pensions through private superannuation companies, in this way making pensions another source of profit for private enterprise. The following excerpts present a different point of view from that of the French government. They come from an article by Dominique Mezzi, "Social Security in Danger", which appeared in October 5 issue of Rouge, which was translated by Afrodity Giannakis. It was 50 years ago, on October 4, 1945, when a ruling proclaimed the "organisation of Social Security as intended to protect the workers and their families against any kind of risks likely to reduce or remove their ability to earn a salary". In the preamble of the Constitution of 1946, which is still in force, it notes that "everyone who, by reason of his/her age, his/her physical or mental condition, or the economic situation, finds himself or herself unable to work has the right to obtain from the community appropriate means of existence". What government today would abide by these declarations? While over the last 20 years the wealth of the country has increased by 50%, they want to make us believe that the economic crisis is a natural cataclysm that destroys all social rights. According to [French Prime Minister Alain] Juppé and [President Jaques] Chirac, the expenditure on health, pensions, unemployment benefits and the minimum benefits paid to those with no other source of income, will bankrupt the country and that we could find ourselves in a state of "national peril". But how is it that for 50 years no one has thought of cutting out government expenditure on the motor car, today subsidised by the budget? The reason is that only profit counts. Motor car sales help private enterprises do well by exploiting collective needs. But health and pensions are in the main beyond the reach of private capital (except for the pharmaceutical companies). The Social Security budget is more than two thousand billion francs [$550 billion] that are out of reach of the "market". For the gentlemen of the CNPF [French National Employers Council] this is definitely an intolerable situation — especially since it's been this way since 1945! That's why they are sabotaging social security. As was the case with telecommunications and Renault, they want to privatise it, to replace it by insurance companies. Each individual would buy their degree of protection from their insurance company. For every illness, for every risk, for every turning point in life, we'd have to negotiate with these sharks. Unemployment represents a loss of more than three hundred billion francs for Social Security, that is, more than five times its deficit! The struggle for employment, for a reduction in working time, is therefore also the key to guaranteeing the continuation of the social security system. However, since we are on the subject of the deficit and tax reform, why don't we demand that profit be taxed at the same rate as salary contributions? This is where the real inequalities lie in this country: 100,000 people, less than 0.1% of the population, devour 20% of the annual wealth. One per cent own 55% of all assets. We need to build a nation-wide movement to reverse this course of events and make a step towards equality and solidarity.