SHARE
COPY LINK

POLITICS

OPINION: Anti health passport protests will continue in France, but this is not a new ‘yellow vest’ moment

Tens of thousands of people have been protesting against health passports in France -John Lichfield examines who they are, what their complaints are and whether this is the beginning of a new anti-government 'yellow vest' moment.

OPINION: Anti health passport protests will continue in France, but this is not a new 'yellow vest' moment
Anti health passport protesters in Marseille. Photo: Clement Mahoudeau/AFP

Street protests against the French health pass are continuing – and growing.

Another series of demonstrations nationwide is expected on Saturday, the day before new rules exile the “non-vaccinated” from bars and restaurants.

READ ALSO Health passport: What changes in France on August 1st?

On the other hand, the French vaccination programme is booming.

The average number of first shots given daily has doubled since President Emmanuel Macron announced two weeks ago that it would become impossible to travel long distances or have much fun in France without being vaccinated or without taking constant – and no longer free – Covid tests.

If Macron’s plan was to force the vax-shy and vax-lazy into the vax-centres, it has been a huge success. In Britain, by comparison, the once once-excellent vaccination programme has all but collapsed. By my reckoning, France (now averaging 330,000 first shots a day) will overtake Britain (averaging 40,000 a day) in the total number of  first vaccinations in about three weeks’ time.

READ ALSO Four million French get vaxxed in two weeks since Macron’s announcement

A man wears a yellow armband with a star of David reading “not vaccinated” at a demonstration in Nantes. Photo by Sebastien SALOM-GOMIS / AFP

How seriously should we take the anti-pass protests? Is this the beginning of another Gilets Jaunes (yellow vests) movement?

Are the “anti-passers” and the Gilets Jaunes the same people? How much support do they have in the nation as a whole?

First, some figures.

There were 160,000 protesters in more than 200 manifs across France last Saturday – a 30 percent increase on the week before. This is about half the number of people who turned out for the first Gilets Jaunes protests in November 2018.

In Paris, there were 11,000 protesters in three separate marches. About 300 people, many of them wearing yellow vests, invaded the Champs Elysées in the evening and were scattered by police water-cannons.

Police forces use water canons to disperse protesters on the Champs-Elysées on Saturday. Photo by Alain JOCARD / AFP

In terms of wider support, an opinion poll in the Journal du Dimanche last Sunday suggested that one in three French people – 35 percent of the sample questioned – supported the movement. In the early days of the Gilets Jaunes, popular support was over 70 percent.

One in three sounds a lot. In French terms, it’s fairly feeble. Almost all anti-government protests, whatever the government, whatever the issue, attract at least 50 percent support

According to the IFOP poll for the Journal du Dimanche, support for the anti-passers is heavily concentrated on the hard left (57 percent support) and the hard-right (49 percent) and overlaps to a large degree with the Gilets Jaunes and ex-Gilets Jaunes (67 percent). In other words, it is, in part, an anti-Macron movement supported by the most Macron-hating sections of France.

It is also more than that. Support for the movement among the young is quite strong – 51 percent among 18-to-35s. The people who marched on the last two Saturdays were not all anti-vaxxers or conspiracy theorists (although many were).

The movement is an odd one – even more eclectic than the Gilets Jaunes in their early days. The anti-passers range from the sincere to the selfish, from the apolitical to the very political, from the cynical to the nutty.

There were banners on Saturday which said “masks make children autistic” or “vaccines create variants”. There were also banners saying “pro-vaccine but also pro-liberty”.

A fringe of the movement is violent. Several vaccine centres have been vandalised. One, in a marquee in the western Pyrenees, was burned to the ground. Politicians and pro-vaccine scientists and prominent doctors have received death threats.

Many demonstrators on Saturday again resorted to outrageous comparisons, wearing the yellow stars of David imposed on Jews by the Nazi occupiers of France or suggesting that the health pass was a form of “apartheid.”

This is not just outrageous but stupid. Jews could not choose not to be Jews in 1940-44. Black South Africans could not choose to be white. The fact that they were Jewish or non-white was not a threat to the rest of the population.

On the other hand, some of the people in Saturday’s marches made coherent arguments against Macron’s decision to bring a degree of coercion to French anti-Covid vaccine policy. Macron himself was against coercion until this month, it should be remembered.

To summarise their arguments;

“This is an attack on fundamental liberties…We have a right to decide what to do with our own bodies…This is just the beginning. If we don’t protest now, more freedoms will be eroded…”

“There is some evidence that Covid vaccines are a threat to a tiny minority. Why should young people be vaccinated when Covid is no threat to them?”

“If coercion was not justified before, why is it justified now when so many people are already vaccinated and the new variants are not causing much serious illness/death?”

These arguments are at least rational. They deserve to be addressed. That appears to be the government’s strategy – to separate the reasonable protesters from the cynics and the obsessives.

The counter-argument needs to be heard, more strongly and more clearly than it has so far. As the philosopher Michel Onfray (no fan of Macron’s) points out, to refuse to be vaccinated is not just a personal choice. It effects all of us.

More than a score of vaccines are already compulsory in France. Those rules are also an “attack on personal liberty”. So are the seat-belt and drink-driving laws.

Covid-19 and its progeny will be with us for many months – maybe even for years. The fact that 60 percent of France is now first-vaxxed is good – but not enough. At least 90 percent is probably needed for herd immunity.

The reducing number of deaths and acute illness conceals a vast number of long Covid cases which may leave even young people permanently damaged or diminished.

Should Macron have simply made vaccination compulsory? Maybe. It was, however, a reasonable compromise to say to the non-vaccinated: “It’s your choice to refuse to be protected. It’s our choice not to have to meet you in confined spaces.”

My prediction is that the demonstrations will continue. They may even be somewhat larger this weekend.

The nutters and the diehards and the weekend hobby-protesters will go on indefinitely. The more moderate, sensible protesters will melt away as the peak August holiday season begins.

Member comments

  1. Very damaging to the extremely old as well as those who are not able to have the vaccine. People do not know where they can buy food in their area where only box stores are found. I imagine the elderly will be starved to death unless help is provided to shop for them.

    1. Rubbish – extremely old can and already were vaccinated. The number of people who can’t be vaccinated because of medical issue is vanishingly small – and supermarkets / pharmacies aren’t affected by pass sanitaire.

      1. Thank you for your opinion. In my area, there are no food stores under 20 000 meters which was my main concern. There are people who cannot be injected.

  2. I don’t recall ever reading Lichfield writing in support of any social movement in France? And France has so many.

  3. I don’t share the opinion that these measures will result in France overtaking the UK’s programme ‘in a few weeks’. Uk has already vaccinated 87% of all adults and has achieved that without any coercion. The trouble with coercive methods is that it will result in a quick positive result amongst some but harden attitudes amongst the rest. Polarising people on an issue like this was maybe not the best way to go. We’ll see.

    1. Way to miss the point – the speed of vaccination of people in the UK slowed down to a trickle, while in France the push to vaccinate sped the process quite dramatically. Unless UK will start some sort of coercive programme a la France, it will be overtaken. And France is doing even better in full vaccinations – due to shorter waiting periods between doses.

      In percentages of the total population:
      1 dose – 70% vs 60%
      2 doses – 56% vs 50%

  4. The number of people who have died within days of being faxed is being suppressed by governments throughout the world. I personally know of three people who died after being vaccinated; I know of no one who died of co-vid 19, thankfully. Remember the pharmaceutical companies take no responsibility for any adverse effects, including death. There is no informed consent either. In many cases it has nullified life insurance claims. There are therapeutics that work very well if administered in a timely manner. Pharmaceutical companies have done everything they can to prevent their use. It seems the financial incentives of the pharmaceutical interests and fear on the part of some in the medical community not to comply plus government interests has created a situation to usher in a new world order.

  5. Let us respect those refusing to be vacced, be their reasons sincere or silly. Also let there be an enforceable and official document for them to carry which affirms their views, stating that they require no medical treatment or attention whatever in the event of their contracting a covid virus. That would be fair, wouldn’t it and remove the need for them to go running about and disturbing the peace?

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.
For members

POLITICS

What does the new government mean for foreigners in France?

France at last has a new government and one of its four main aims is to "control immigration and promote integration" - so what is this likely to mean for foreigners in France, or those hoping to move here some day?

What does the new government mean for foreigners in France?

After two weeks of intense negotiation, on Thursday evening newly-appointed prime minister Michel Barnier announced that he had succeeded in forming a government.

 He also laid out his four main priorities;

  • Improve the standard of living for the French and the workings of public services, especially schools and healthcare
  • Guarantee security, control immigration and improve integration
  • Encourage businesses and agriculture and build upon the economic attractiveness of France
  • Get public finances under control and reduce debt

He is set to give his Discours de politique générale on October 1st – this is the traditional speech that a prime minister makes laying out the main policy aims of their government.

So what is this likely to mean for foreigners living in France?

Obviously some of these things will have the same effect on foreigners as any other residents of France, since we all use the same healthcare and education systems.

The first challenge for the new government will be a budget that, as Barnier says, “gets public finances under control”. France is facing a ballooning deficit and the threat of a downgrade from ratings agencies if it cannot get spending under control.

Barnier said earlier in the week that he is “discovering that the country’s budgetary situation is very serious” – most people interpreted this as preparing to announce tax hikes.

No details of these plans have been released, but it is thought likely that extra taxes will be on business and the super-rich rather than any increase in income tax or VAT.

Emmanuel Macron’s centrist Renaissance group briefed the press that one of their conditions for joining the new government was a pledge that any tax increases would not target “the middle classes or working French people”.

Immigration

But the strand of government that is most likely to affect foreigners in France, or those hoping to move here some day, is the pledge to “control immigration and promote integration”.

Again there is no detail on this, but the French government’s most recent bill to “promote integration” introduced language tests for certain types of residency card, while raising the language standard required for other processes.

We know that Barnier himself is strongly to the right on the topic of immigration – in his unsuccessful 2022 bid for the Les Républicains presidential nomination he called for a total moratorium on all immigration into France from non-EU countries.

Barnier said he would organise a referendum if elected, asking voters to approve constitutional changes and the ability of parliament to set immigrant quotas each year.

The exact composition of the new government has not been revealed – it is expected “before Sunday” – but we do know that Barnier has appointed several ministers from within the Les Républicains party.

These are reported to include Bruno Retailleau, who sparked outcry with his comments about immigrants in the context of the 2022 riots.

Speaking about the rioters who were arrested, 90 percent of whom were French citizens, he said: “OK, they’re French, but these are French people in their official identity, and unfortunately for the second and third generations (of immigrants), there is a sort of regression towards their ethnic roots.”

Clearly for some politicians, you can never be integrated enough.

New laws?

Although it’s far too early to think of any specific policies – and the government may not last long enough to actually see any laws passed – the debate around France’s recent immigration bill does provide some clues about the goals of right-wing politicians.

The Immigration law that finally passed in January changed – among other things – conditions for certain types of residency card and introduced expanded language tests, a civics test and a declaration of allegiance to ‘French values’ for foreigners living here.

READ ALSO What changes under France’s new immigration bill

However as the bill progressed through parliament, many right-wing lawmakers attempted to add amendments to toughen it up. In the end, most of the amendments were either voted down in parliament or struck out later by the Constitutional Council, but they do provide a guide to right-wing goals.

Among the rejected amendments were;

Migration quotas – the original bill contained nothing about migration quotas, but a section on this was added in the Senate (which is controlled by Les Républicains). The amendment was vague, setting out only the principle that parliament can set migration quotas – the wording of the text talked about ‘economic migration’, suggesting that these quotas would apply only to people coming to France to work, not students or retirees. The quotas would not affect asylum seekers or people arriving on a family reunification visa.

It called for parliament to have an annual debate on migration, with the ‘objective’ of setting quotas or numbers.

This was one of many amendments that was eventually struck out by the Constitutional Council – although on procedural grounds, not because of its content.

Healthcare restrictions – currently undocumented foreigners who are in France for more than three months are entitled to basic healthcare under the Aide medicale de l’Etat, with costs reimbursed by the State for hospital treatment and medication. The amendment proposed a complete ban on this for anyone who is undocumented or in an irregular immigration situation.

Benefit restrictions – currently foreigners in France can qualify for benefits such as housing allowance or certain family benefits after they have been resident for six months, the amendment aimed to increase the qualification period to five years.

Expelling radicalised foreigners – the law that was eventually passed makes it easier to expel radicalised foreigners by removing certain protections, including the restriction that people who came to France aged 13 or under cannot be expelled once they reach adulthood. The amendment aimed toughen this up still further by allowing the expulsion not just of people who are on terror watchlists, but of people who have “committed a grave and deliberate violation of the principles of the French Republic”.

Toughen asylum rules – various amendments aimed to make it easier to expel failed asylum seekers by reducing the amount of time for appeals and allowing a notice to quit the country to be served as soon as a first application is rejected.

Limit family reunification rights – rules around foreigners in France being joined by spouses or family members would also be tightened up under the amendment, with a minimum stay of 24 months before you can be joined by a spouse or family member, and extra financial requirements.

French citizenship for children born in France – currently children who are born in France to foreign parents are automatically given the right to French citizenship once they reach 18 under the droit du sol principle (although in order to do anything practical like get a passport or ID card they still need to apply for a naturalisation certificate). Several amendments proposed that this no longer be an automatic right and children must “express their will” to get citizenship – presumably through an extra admin procedures.

All the immigration measures listed above would apply to non-EU nationals – anyone who needs a visa or carte de séjour to spend more than three months in France.

SHOW COMMENTS