French Finance Minister Seeks to Avoid Budget Ordinances Amid Deficit Pressure

French Finance Minister Roland Lescure said Sunday he would prefer Parliament to approve the country’s 2027 budget rather than have the government put it into effect through executive ordinances, even as lawmakers struggle to agree on measures to narrow the deficit. In an interview broadcast on October 11 by France 2 and France Inter, he described ordinances as a fallback that would leave less room to reflect the parliamentary debate.

The minister did not rule them out. He argued that France still needs a budget consistent with a public deficit of 5% of gross domestic product next year, a limit he has presented as central to negotiations. His comments came after a parliamentary committee rejected the revenue portion of the draft budget on Friday, underscoring the difficulty facing Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu’s government in a fragmented National Assembly.

The budget argument is unfolding against a deteriorating fiscal outlook. France now expects a 2026 deficit of 5.4% of GDP, above the 5% previously planned, and faces a rising interest bill as it continues to borrow heavily. Agreeing on the 2027 measures is therefore about more than meeting a parliamentary deadline: the government is trying to establish a credible path for borrowing and public spending without an assured majority to support it.

A committee defeat before the full Assembly debate

The government filed its 2027 finance bill on October 1. After three days of work, the National Assembly’s finance committee voted on October 9 against the first part of the bill, which deals with revenue. The vote was 31 against, three in favor and two abstentions, according to LCP, the parliamentary television channel. The result was a rejection of the committee’s amended version, not a final rejection of the budget by Parliament.

That distinction matters for what happens next. The bill is scheduled to reach the full National Assembly on Tuesday, October 13, starting with a debate on public debt and the revenue provisions. Lawmakers will take up the government’s original proposal rather than automatically adopting the committee’s amendments. The lower house must deal with the revenue section before proceeding to the spending section, so disagreement over taxes and other receipts can disrupt the timetable for the rest of the budget.

Committee deliberations exposed a problem that will return on the floor. Opposition lawmakers sought changes to the government’s revenue measures, and members of the governing camp objected to aspects of the amended text. Lescure said Sunday that amendments adopted in committee would have widened the projected deficit by more than €8 billion. That is the minister’s characterization of their budgetary effect, not an independently established final cost of legislation.

Without a dependable Assembly majority, Lecornu needs at least enough political cooperation to keep the bill moving. A budget can be amended substantially during parliamentary scrutiny, but the finance ministry has repeatedly made clear that it will judge the outcome against its deficit ceiling. The tension is straightforward: lawmakers may seek to soften individual measures, yet changes that reduce revenue or add expenditure must be offset elsewhere if the overall target is to hold.

The fiscal figures behind the 5% target

The government’s October 1 presentation of the draft budget sets out the scale of that task. Officials forecast a deficit of 5.4% of GDP in 2026 and seek to reduce it to 5.0% in 2027. For comparison, the public deficit was 5.1% in 2025. Reaching the proposed 2027 figure would improve the balance from this year’s expected outcome, but would still leave France running a large annual deficit.

The fiscal adjustment is broader than a single spending-cut figure. According to the government’s breakdown, the plan depends on €43 billion of new measures in the 2027 finance and social-security bills, plus €11 billion from earlier decisions that are expected to have an effect next year. The total, €54 billion, is an estimate of the effort needed to improve the public finances, not a claim that the government will cut €54 billion directly from departmental budgets.

Roughly 60% of the planned effort is meant to come from controlling expenditure, the government says. Its proposals include holding the budgets of ministries other than defense flat in nominal euros relative to 2026, while seeking restraint across parts of the public sector. The government also proposes tax measures, although it says it wants to avoid across-the-board tax increases and plans to adjust income-tax brackets for inflation. Those choices give lawmakers several areas to negotiate, with differing consequences for households, businesses and government revenue.

The economic assumptions are also demanding. The finance ministry expects growth of just 0.5% in 2026, followed by 1.0% in 2027. That improvement assumes some easing of international pressures, including the Middle East conflict and its effects on energy costs. Forecasts are not guarantees: weaker growth or higher financing costs could make the deficit harder to reduce even if Parliament approves the measures substantially as proposed.

Debt-service costs illustrate the pressure. The government’s budget documents project interest charges rising from €79.2 billion this year to €91.2 billion in 2027, an increase of €12 billion. The National Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies reported that public debt stood at €3.596 trillion, or 119.0% of GDP, at the end of the second quarter of 2026. The government projects debt equivalent to 119.3% of GDP for 2026 as a whole. These are different measurements for different dates, not competing estimates of the same quarter.

For creditors, the political question is whether the proposed restraint survives the legislative process. Lescure acknowledged in the government’s budget presentation that French interest rates had been rising faster than the euro-area average. An improved deficit forecast alone cannot settle that concern if the measures underpinning it are weakened or delayed. Nor would meeting the 5% target eliminate new borrowing: it would mean a smaller annual shortfall relative to the size of the economy than projected for 2026.

What an ordinance would mean for the budget

France has more than one constitutional route available when budget negotiations stall, but they are not interchangeable. Under Article 47 of the French Constitution, if Parliament has not reached a decision on a finance bill within 70 days, its provisions may be brought into force by ordinance. The article also lays out earlier deadlines for the National Assembly and Senate. An ordinance under this provision is distinct from the ordinary decrees that can be used to release funds for previously approved commitments when a budget has not been adopted in time.

Article 49.3 is a separate mechanism. It allows the prime minister, following cabinet deliberations, to make passage of a finance bill an issue of confidence. The bill is then considered passed unless the National Assembly adopts a motion of no confidence under the constitutional procedure. That route can advance a budget without a conventional vote on the text, but it also gives opponents a direct means of bringing down the government.

Lescure’s preference for avoiding ordinances reflects an additional political difficulty: bypassing a full parliamentary outcome would make it harder to incorporate concessions offered during negotiations. He compared the ordinance option to a safety barrier designed to prevent the budget process from going off course. It was not presented as his preferred way to make fiscal policy. The government’s October 1 briefing likewise described the draft as open to negotiation, provided the deficit target remained intact.

There is a recent reminder of what happens when budget negotiations run late. Government officials said France entered 2026 under special budget legislation that maintained financial continuity but temporarily froze some measures pending agreement on a full budget. The administration argues that another prolonged impasse would add economic uncertainty just as higher interest charges are reducing fiscal room.

For now, the next test is the National Assembly’s October 13 debate, beginning with the public-debt discussion and the revenue side of the finance bill. Lawmakers will have the opportunity to challenge the government’s proposals in the chamber. Whether those negotiations produce a budget consistent with the 5% deficit target will determine how close the government comes to using the exceptional procedures Lescure says he would rather avoid.