In the early hours of a Saturday, the French government put forward two new motions that aimed to condemn certain actions and shake the balance of power within the National Assembly. There were already twenty such motions in just seventeen months of this legislature, and none managed to secure the 289 votes necessary to topple the Executive Council. The attempts carried a long view, shaped in part by tacit support from the classical right, particularly the Republicans, toward the current administration led by Prime Minister Élisabeth Borne. In France, a motion of no confidence historically serves to remove the governing team without presenting an immediate alternative, a nuance that colors how lawmakers evaluate each bid more than simply counting votes.
During this session, both texts faltered in the National Assembly. One came from the far-right National Rally (RN), while the other originated with the far-left France Unbowed (LFI). Both factions rallied at different points, gathering around allied groups to press their case, but neither could harness enough cross-party backing to alter the government’s posture. The dynamics illustrate how the assembly wrestles with a fragmented landscape where coalition-building is as important as the sheer numbers of support for any given proposition.
The pushback reflected broader strategic moves by the second and third most represented groups in the chamber. These actors submitted motions in the wake of repeated uses of Article 49.3 of the Constitution by the executive branch. This provision allows the government to pass legislation without the need for a formal vote in the assembly, a mechanism that remains controversial because it can bypass the standard debate and blockage points within the chamber. The method keeps the government in motion and often triggers political consequences outside the chamber, as opposition voices rally to reassess procedural norms and the balance of executive power.
Among all the motions associated with Borne’s administration, the one that came closest to success unfolded on March 20, following a contentious pension reform vote that proceeded without a formal parliamentary ballot. On that day, a contingent of Republican lawmakers shifted their stance, aligning with some left-wing and far-right colleagues in what appeared to be a rare compromise. The government escaped with a narrow margin, upheld by a mere nine votes, a result that underscored the fragility of parliamentary consensus and the persistent pressure from multiple factions to reframe the power dynamics within the capital.