The man who may be the next finance minister thinks so
By S.P. | PARIS
ON FRENCH radio this morning, Michel Sapin, François Hollande's head of policy (pictured below), accused The Economist of being “anti-French and anti-Socialist”, after this week's cover.
A few quick thoughts. The first is to wonder what Mr Hollande would have made of an Economist cover that called him the best thing for France. To be associated with an economically liberal newspaper is not an obvious vote-winner for a candidate in a market-hostile country like France.
For example, I'm not sure that Manuel Valls appreciated being singled out, among the Socialist presidential candidates, for having the courage to say how tough things are likely to be for the new president in an article I wrote last August ahead of the party primary.
I would also point out to French readers that, as far as I know (these things get decided in London), the reason that the editor chose to put the word "dangerous" on the cover was as a humorous clin d'oeil at the first words that Mr Hollande pronounced when he turned up in London on the campaign trail: “I am not dangerous”.
Our leader gives Mr Hollande credit where it is due, stating:
With a Socialist president, France would get one big thing right. Mr Hollande opposes the harsh German-enforced fiscal tightening which is strangling the euro zone's chances of recovery.
It goes on to argue that the danger is not that Mr Hollande is pushing a growth agenda in Europe, which The Economist has also called for. It is rather that:
…unlike, say, Italy's Mario Monti, Mr Hollande's objection to the compact is not just about such macroeconomic niceties as the pace of fiscal tightening. It is chiefly resistance to change and a determination to preserve the French social model at all costs. Mr Hollande is not suggesting slower fiscal adjustment to smooth the path of reform.
Finally, it is worth recalling that The Economist has run some pretty harsh covers about non-Socialists in France, including both Nicolas Sarkozy (The incredible shrinking president) and his predecessor, Jacques Chirac (Liberty, equality, impunity?).
Thanks to a dig into the archives by an intern in London, I've been taking a look at what we have said ahead of previous presidential French elections (of which more, I hope, in another post). In 1981, we endorsed Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, the conservative incumbent, against François Mitterrand, his Socialist challenger, chiefly out of worries about Communists and the “Marchais connection”.
But in 1988, The Economist strongly backed Mitterrand for re-election, over both Mr Chirac and Raymond Barre. We “would welcome another spell of Mr Mitterrand”, we said, adding that he was “the best of a good bunch for France”.
