Why is decentralisation a reform of the State?

Résumé du document

Globalization, Europeanization and Decentralization form the core of the pressures faced by nations. "A State without the means of some change is without the means of its conservation,? said Edmund Burke (quoted by Norton in Jones et al. 2004: 348). Thus, if the study of changes is interesting, the assessment of continuities, or as the new world leaders would put it, of path dependencies, is indeed sometimes even more stimulating. In that context therefore, at first sight, the French State appears to be confronted to a large range of challenges, both external and internal. These challenges push for a modification of its traditional role. However, the aim of this essay is to study to some extent both the changes and the elements of continuity that lie behind the later of these pressures, as a result of decentralization. This subject, though already ancient, has regularly been at the top of the French political agenda since the Deferred laws of 1982. The last manifestation of its importance in French politics occurred with Raffarin's constitutional reform of 2003.

Extraits

[...] What changes therefore is not the capacity of the French State to intervene at a local level. It is rather the way it adopts in order to do so. As a final remark, since decentralisation concerns every citizen in France, it may be worth broadening the discussion to a critical analysis of French society as a whole. Indeed, at the time of writing, the electoral campaign for the European constitution is raging. It appears that French society is settling its own hashes at this occasion. [...]

[...] Departmental councils are particularly important for social matters and roads. In terms of staff and means, they represent the most important structure within local governments. The regions are by comparison very light structures, mainly in charge of economic strategy and vocational training. However, the importance of the region shall not be underestimated, for it constitutes the very place where all actors meet and discuss, according to features that will be seen later. The second principle is the one of ‘free administration of local authorities.' Thus, if local governments have compulsory services to deliver, they can also intervene in every matter that concerns their own level. [...]

[...] The implementation of decisions is hierarchical and rule-driven. Very few places are left to local adaptation, even though, as we have seen, exceptions could always be negotiated. They are taken by the way of a constant meeting between local personalities, les notables, and the State representative, the préfet. In that model, the préfet is by the way much more an ally of notables than an enemy (Elgie 2003: 220). In addition, the practice of cumul des mandats allows a lot of politicians to play at a national level in order to enhance their local interests. [...]

[...] Thus, for example, the mayor of a small village in Brittany holds, legally speaking, as many power as the one of Marseilles. Even more, through this lens, the less powerful mayor of France appears to be the one of Paris, since he does not have the police power at his disposal, belonging as it is to the préfet de police. This last instance emphasizes two important things. Firstly, if decentralisation is only approach through a legal perspective, there is little chance to understand in depth its features in France. This approach is certainly necessary, but not sufficient. [...]

[...] The mayor of Paris is one example. The most striking one, in a country so ferociously secular, seems to be the one of Alsace-Moselle. Indeed, due to historical circumstances, these three departments are still under the Napoleonic Concordat, signed with the Pope Pie VII in 1801. Thus, however categorical and rigid the French system could appear, there is always room for manoeuvre. The logic acting beneath the surface includes two distinct dimensions, which might appear contradictory (Cole 2005: 116-7). The first one is close to the European principle of subsidiarity. [...]