So far the status quo is not development

What territorial organization for the France What utilities on our territories Installed late October 2008, the Balladur Committee for the reform of local Government has to submit his report to the President of the Republic. Students territorial Directors of Inet, future executives of local and regional authorities, wish to bring some elements for reflection in this debate.

Born with Defferre laws in 1982, decentralization is a strong ambition: adapt policies and public services to the needs of each territory. By bringing the political decision of the citizens, decentralization has to take into account the diversity of local interests and to improve the quality of public service. That is why the reform of local and regional authorities should allow the deepening of decentralization. In this regard, the recommendations of the Committee seem too timid and too prescriptive.

Removing programmed the general jurisdiction of the regions and departments clause sends a wrong signal to local elected representatives and citizens: the mistrust of the State in the territories. Why organize political elections if the purpose of a Department is circumscribed tomorrow its only welfare On the contrary, it must be pragmatic.

Decentralization is not a garden à la française. Local interests Commander its implementation, the Department should be able to seize skills corresponding to the needs of the territories.

So far, the status quo is not development. Rather than remove the general jurisdiction clause, the notion of community leader should be pardoned. We support the common position of the associations of elected representatives put in place for the departments and areas of priority jurisdiction clauses: each community level priority exercise skills set by law. The delegation of powers to a new level would be possible and exclusive, thus reducing cross financing. This proposal that prefers the flexibility to the arbitrary and consistency would have earned to be included in the report submitted by Mr. Balladur.

In addition, the territorial Yarrow complements Yarrow devolved State and its agencies. A significant part of the administrative rationalization and plays between the State, of one part, and the communities, on the other. It would be desirable that this question, addressed to the margin by the Committee, be introduced in the heart of the debate by the Government and parliamentarians.

In proposing voluntary groupings of communities, the Balladur Committee will on the other hand in the right direction. Thus, the completion of the map of the intermunicipal by 2014 will strengthen the means of small communities. The promotion departments and regions of larger size will allow them to weigh in a framework rather than national, but European. But these mergers can be done only at the initiative of the communities and with the agreement of the populations concerned. Otherwise, the decentralization and its corollary, the principle of free administration, are emptied of all content.

Thus, the proposal-lighthouse of creation of the Grand Paris, consisting of to merge the four departments of the heart of the Parisian agglomeration, takes track since most of the communities concerned refuse this solution.

Instead of creating new statute the cities and the cities should relax the conditions for fusion between communities and to offer financial and tax incentives to these groupings. The recommendations in the sense of Didier Quentin and Jean-Jacques Urvoas in a recent report to the National Assembly should have been more widely repeated.

The Balladur Committee proposals include a tax component, which can be welcomed. However, instead of finally ensure local financial autonomy with the constitutional principle is regularly updated with evil, the Committee merely measures at the margin. The State is largely based on communities to finance its own ambitions: universities, stimulus plan high-speed lines, etc. Rather than to wish the evolution of local expenditure framework accompanied by the creation of an umpteenth control instance, the Committee could propose to guarantee the financial communities, hardest sought margins of manoeuvre in these times of crisis. The reform of the community is also a unique opportunity to strengthen the fiscal transparency and equalization between communities rich and less rich. A national debate on the future of the financing of the communities and local taxes should be opened.

Finally, the Committee committed itself to the strengthening of the legitimacy of the elected representatives of the cities and the intercommunalités. This proposal is welcome: enhancement of the level of community imposed that their political leaders are elected by direct universal suffrage. However, changes in the modes of departmental and regional elections, which should enable some elected to sit in two instances, may strengthen the overlapping of mandates.

At this stage, the impression which dominates is that the proposed reform promotes theoretical patterns and insufficiently takes into account local interests and the opinion of the population.