The French elections that changed nothing.

French people take democracy seriously when there is a stake and a sense that their ballots will make a difference. Politics is endlessly debated with passion, especially over good food. But for the second round of regional elections, half of the electorate chose - again - to linger over lunch. In the search for explanations for this mediocre turnout, pundits are invoking the usual suspects, i.e. the rise of the left and a sanction against the ruling party (UMP). No one seems to be considering that many voters might have found it more rational not to vote to elect councillors whose job it is to oversee a decentralised bureaucracy with reduced fiscal powers and plagued, like the rest of the State, with worrying levels of debt.
.
The facts are compelling. 21 of the 22 metropolitan regional councils now have left-leaning majorities (Parti Socialiste and Europe Ecologie). The overall results (including the resurgence of the far-right Front National) are clearly humiliating for the UMP but it should not be forgotten that they also mirror those of the 2004 regional ballot. Using a rugby analogy on the weekend the national team had won the six-nation-tournament, analysts were quick to point out that the Left with its electoral tsunami had not succeeded in “converting the try” in the 2007 presidential elections. The leaders of the victorious side, Martine Aubry (PS) and Daniel Cohn-Bendit (EE) are jubilant. But no-one is fooled, least of all the electorate, who know too well that in a highly centralised state like France, the real power lies at the centre, Paris.
.
Still, regions matter and the socialists love them. Since their introduction in the current form during the Mitterrand years (1984 Law on decentralisation, 1986 first direct elections), the Left has been the dominant force of this extra layer of the proverbial French administrative “mille-feuilles” (like the cake, with many layers). Regions have acquired competences in the fields of economic development, education, transport and culture. Over the years as budget expanded and local taxes increased, the Regional Council has become a nexus of considerable power and influence. In a region like Bretagne (Brittany) with a strong sense of cultural identity the President presides over a deliberative assembly of 83 councillors and a small executive. Importantly, he administers a budget of €1.1 billion (2009, population of 3.1 million) supported in this task by a large bureaucracy, namely 3500 agents spread across the four departments. The state-appointed regional governor (Préfet) nevertheless remains in law the most powerful authority.
.
France is a rich patchwork of cultures but historically regionalism has never sat comfortably with the Jacobin tradition. With the creation of the regions, critics have observed that the State has only paid lip-service to decentralisation by simply inserting another costly layer of administration, effectively co-opting local political élite into the national political class. For the economist Emmanuel Martin, the regions illustrate the root-problem of the French style decentralisation. He argues that the model has had to counter excessive centralising forces which in turn led to the establishment of a jungle of local spendthrift fiefdoms with no real fiscal or budgetary responsibilities. The mounting debt of French regions - €25 billion by 2012 - has the Fitch Ratings agency worried (1). Ultimately regions are only accountable to their pay-master, Paris, not to the citizens. From a rational choice theory perspective, it makes sense not to vote.
.
For all the democratic hullabaloo (at a cost of €136 million), many would agree that under the supremely absurd system of “cumul des mandats” which sees politicians holding several elective mandate complete with the cumulative sum of privileges and remunerations, regional elections matter more to the political class than to the citizens. As journalist Yvan Stefanovitch puts it in his thought-provoking book “La Caste des 500: Enquête sur les Princes de la République”, France is ruled by a caste of 500 professional politicians who, be it in their local fiefdoms or at national level, exercise quasi regal powers and live well at the State's expense. Every six years, the “new feudal lords" (an expression borrowed from the essayist Roland Hureaux see "Les nouveaux féodaux. Le contresens de la décentralisation") joust for the control of local administrations and a well-established system of clientelism
.
The Socialist Party Secretary General - the Soviet Union collapsed but not the socialist utopia and its paraphernalia - Martine Aubry is a prominent member of the French nomenklatura. The daughter of former socialist and federalist commissioner Jacques Delors, she sponsored inter alia the economically disastrous 35-hour-week law. On promises of safeguarding the social acquis, saving the public services and redistributing a lot of solidarity, she has made a credible political comeback. How resorting to more statist policies will help resolve the ominous deficit and debt is not clear. While disaffected voters abstained, the SP’s traditional support base (employees of the state sector, 1/5 of the labour force and workers) massively mobilised during the elections. The all-powerful unions with their well-rehearsed disruptive capacity can be trusted to launch public sector demonstrations to obtain concessions from a ruling majority weakened by an electoral "Bérézina" (defeat).
.
Ironically, although elected on a platform of liberal reforms with notably promises to downsize the state and create a favourable environment for the private sector, Nicolas Sarkozy has championed more state intervention in the economy and extravagant public spending (2009 stimulus plan: €39.1 billion. 2010 state loan: €35 billion). In the meantime, unemployment has continued to rise. The ruling party's political discourse is not socialist but by and large, its policies have maintained “l’état providence” (Nanny-state), the very model hailed by the Left. In France, be it at the regional or national level, “plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.” (2)
.

(1) Journal des Finances, 22 March 2010 http://www.jdf.com/indices/2010/03/22/02003-20100322ARTJDF00036-la-dette-des-regions-francaises-sous-surveillance-.php
(2) "The more things change, the more they stay the same"