Commission of inquiry into livestock: the RNI stands out from its allies

The absence of RNI among the signatories remains one of the most notable elements of this sequence. Party of the Head of Government and central component of the majority, the National gathering of independents is at the center of the political readings sparked by this initiative. Without being sufficient to conclude that there is a fracture within the government alliance, this absence has, however, taken on a particular significance since the RNI parliamentary group explained, in a press release, its refusal to join the process.

The group first invokes a precedent: this initiative would have already been carried out by the same actors without bringing together the legal quorum necessary for the creation of a commission of inquirybefore an exploratory mission proposed by the majority groups did not succeed either. He also highlights the proximity of the end of the legislature, which would no longer make it possible, according to him, to respect the constitutional and procedural deadlines necessary for the creation of the commission and the accomplishment of its mission.

The RNI also considers that the subject does not, despite its importance, fall under exceptional cases having justified the use of commissions of inquiry, historically associated, according to it, with major national questions of an urgent nature or of particular current affairs. On the political level, the group reaffirms its attachment to Majority Charterwhich it presents as a framework of coherence in the implementation of the government program. While refusing to be associated with the initiative, it claims to retain its control prerogatives within the framework provided for by the Constitution and the internal regulations of the House of Representatives.

Support forimport of livestock has gained momentum in the public debate as the price of red meatthe state of national livestock and market supply were becoming more sensitive. The years of droughtthe pressure on the breedersthe cost of animal feed and price pressures have placed the sector among the most closely followed social concerns.

Faced with this situation, the State has mobilized several mechanisms to support supplies and contain the effects of the crisis. It remains to measure its real effectiveness: has the aid provided relief to the consumer? Did they benefit the targeted actors? Have the exemptions and facilities granted been reflected in prices? And according to what criteria were the beneficiaries identified? It is in this area that the file goes beyond the budgetary reading alone. It affects the readability of public action, the traceability of support mechanisms and the capacity of public authorities to demonstrate that the effort made has produced the expected effects.

The constitution of a parliamentary commission of inquiry follows a precise framework. It assumes a specific purpose, formal conditions and an operation governed by the Constitution, the organic law relating to commissions of inquiry and the internal regulations of the House of Representatives. It is this institutional dimension that the signatory groups highlight. Their correspondence recalls the need to create favorable conditions for the success of this initiative. By involving opposition groups, they seek to broaden its parliamentary base and place it beyond the mere internal balances of the majority.

The response of RNI however, introduces another reading of this same institutional dimension. The group does not say it places itself outside parliamentary control; he contests the appropriateness of resorting to a commission of inquiry at this stage of the legislature, given the time required for its constitution and the accomplishment of its mission. If it sees the light of day, the commission will have to clarify specific facts. Its effectiveness will depend on the precision of its scope: nature of the aid concerned, periods examined, categories of beneficiaries, volumes imported, amounts committed, exemptions granted, control mechanisms and effects on prices.

The political and institutional value of such a commission will be measured by its ability to answer specific questions. Who benefited from the support mechanisms? According to what criteria? What controls accompanied the granting of aid or advantages? Did imports meet market needs? And have public measures really helped to contain prices, or have they mainly benefited certain economic operators? Clarification will also be necessary on the nature of the amounts mentioned in the public debate. It will be necessary to distinguish the budgetary aid actually paid, the tax exemptions and customs duties, as well as estimates of shortfalls for the State. This distinction is essential to avoid confusion in the figures and to accurately assess the public effort made.

The commission will finally have to look at the other end of the chain: the consumer. The debate on livestock support only takes on its full meaning if it is related to its final objective: protecting supplies, preserving the purchasing power and stabilize a market subject to strong tensions. In this matter, transparency is no longer just a political matter. It concerns the use of public support mechanisms, their targeting, their cost and their real effects on the market. It is on these elements that any control initiative, whatever its form, will be judged.