Display:
French regions, first of all, are not particularly powerful structures; nothing to compare with the German länder, for example. The areas where they most influence policy are education, economic development, and infrastructure (particularly important for regional train services, which SNCF would have allowed to crumble and disappear without regional intervention).

They are almost all run by the Socialist Party. So, predictably, that party tends to defend its record, while the UMP attacks it. As far as positive measures are concerned, the UMP will as usual stress lowering taxes and encouraging private enterprise, while the PS will offer more concrete public projects.

Europe Ecologie (not just les Verts, this is a broader coalition in which, fortunately, les Verts are opening out instead of concentrating on their internal battles) offer a fairly full platform including increase in regional powers, in favour of public services and public transport, renewable energy, "green jobs", "green" farming, localisation, management of territorial problems like urban sprawl. They have by far the fullest bill of proposals (I'm looking at the tracts put out in my region, Midi-Pyrénées).

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Mar 15th, 2010 at 06:22:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
...and because the regions are mostly (20 out of 22) held by the PS, the UMP-led state government has been waging a war on the regional governments.

The most often used trick is to transfer social policies and other expensive burden, like highway maintenance, from the state to the regions, but not the tax receipt income that allows to finance all of this.

In France, regions cannot levy income taxes, it's a privilege of the central government: only a handful of taxes are for the local governments, like property taxes, or the soon to be defunct "professional tax" that was levied on businesses [Sarko decided to suppress this tax, to relieve his business friends and to spite the regions' executives].

Transferring expense burden from the state to the (mostly Socialist) regions allowed our president to implement his tax cuts policies, banskter relief plans, neo-colonial adventures in Afghanistan, etc...

Europeans think a hundred miles is a long way. Americans think a hundred years is a long time.

by Bernard on Mon Mar 15th, 2010 at 08:02:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
regional train services, which SNCF would have allowed to crumble and disappear without regional intervention

Hm... which the French state would have allowed to crumble without regionalisation. As it depends on subsidies, the question is who is willing and able to fork it out.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Mon Mar 15th, 2010 at 08:04:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I say SNCF advisedly. SNCF has no wish to maintain regional services, (I would even say is obstructive), even when the regions provide considerable subsidies (buying new rolling stock, for instance).
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Mar 15th, 2010 at 09:09:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Those subsidies could have been provided by the French state earlier, but weren't (to this extent).

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Mon Mar 15th, 2010 at 09:15:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You're not wrong about the state. In any case, the state should be dictating SNCF policy, since it's wholly public sector. But SNCF has an outdated corporate culture that is still dominated by postwar notions that rail was destined to disappear from the scene (except for HSR, and then, for SNCF, only the more profitable lines).
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Mar 15th, 2010 at 09:20:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
All managements want to bother only with what's profitable -- and branchlines rarely are, even if new vehicles and station renewals get funding and result in boosted passenger numbers. So, on one hand, the corporate culture is a consequence and function of the level of political commitment to subsidizing public transport. On the other hand, this line-by-line view is short-sighted -- and especially SNCF (with the two decades long bad record of its far-from-city-centre TGV stations) should have realised the role of feeders in the profitability of its mainlines. Then again, this over-reductionist line-by-line view is again dictated by politics, for 4-5 decades now.

SNCF is definitely behind its European peers in what's possible with the new vehicles even on mainlines, what with the slow spread of regular interval timeplans, and the policy of limited stop services.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Tue Mar 16th, 2010 at 06:26:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks for this quick primer. Very useful!

And the world will live as one
by Montereyan (robert at calitics dot com) on Mon Mar 15th, 2010 at 01:25:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series