From Fete to Fiasco

Leftist leaders disagree on a new common program

VICTORY FOR THE COMMON PROGRAM IS YOUR BUSINESS proclaimed the banner over the garlic soup and mussel bar. NATIONALIZATION IS THE WAY TO A MORE BEAUTIFUL LIFE was the message next to a cotton candy and candy apple stand. The leftist slogan, FOR A REAL CHANGE, was plastered on the walls of hundreds of booths displaying such gastronomical luxuries as pate de foie gras from the Gascogne and oysters from Arcachon. The scene was the annual ideological carnival sponsored by the Communist daily L'Humanite last week in the Paris suburb of La Courneuve--a uniquely Gallic blend of gourmet food, Marxist rhetoric and midway attractions. Nearly 9,300 new members were signed up during the two-day Red fete, which was attended by 1.5 million people. Boasted one party recruiter: "Ours is a Communism with joie de vivre."

Her optimism was premature. By week's end fete had turned into fiasco and joie into tristesse for the Communists. A long-awaited summit meeting of Socialist, Communist and Radical Party leaders was abruptly halted by a strident, embarrassingly public dispute over the common program--the parties' joint campaign platform for the March 1978 elections.

After one day of talks, Robert Fabre, head of the Left Radical Movement, staged a dramatic walkout in protest against Communist Party Chief Georges Marchais's demand for sweeping changes in the program. As Marchais stepped up before the TV cameras outside the conference hall, Fabre shoved him aside and declared that "the French people are not prepared to sacrifice free enterprise and individual initiative to the extent the Communists would like." Marchais proposed that the Communists and Socialists continue the talks without Radical participation. The Socialists declined, and the summit was suspended.

The deadlock underscored the fragility of the leftist coalition, which, it has been widely predicted, may win the elections for the National Assembly next March. (One poll taken before last week's meeting gave the left a 53% majority.) But any further aggravation of the rift could wreck those victory chances. The dispute focuses attention on the all but ignored third partner in the coalition, Fabre's Radicals. By far the most conservative of the three leftist parties, the Radicals draw much of their support from small shopkeepers and professionals, mainly in southwestern France. Although the Radicals command no more than 4% of the left vote, their support may be crucial to the Socialist and Communist parties if they are to get a working majority in the Assembly.

At issue last week was the ambitious but rather unspecific 81-page common program for social change that the three left parties agreed on in 1972. Socialist Leader Franc,ois Mitterrand wants to keep the original program, with only minor revisions. If the leftist coalition wins and he becomes Premier, Mitterrand needs maximum maneuverability. Since last spring, however, Marchais's Communists have been increasingly shrill in their insistence on radical changes in the program, openly accusing Mitterrand of "demagogy." Mitterrand will need Communist support to achieve his longtime ambition to become Premier of France. But if he accepts the extremist Communist proposals, moderate voters who have recently flocked to the Socialists may give their allegiance to the conservative-centrist coalition of Gaullist Leader Jacques Chirac and President Valery Giscard d'Estaing. Among the major disputed issues in the common program:

Nationalization The original 1972 common program proposed to nationalize nine major industrial groups in France (armaments, aeronautics and space, nuclear industry, pharmaceuticals, electronics, mineral resources, chemicals, computers), plus the entire banking and financial sector of the economy. The Communists want to extend nationalization to the oil companies, the ailing steel industry and the Peugeot-Citroen auto plants--plus all the subsidiary companies owned by the nine industries originally slated for nationalization. The Communist plan would involve paying cash indemnities --a scheme the Socialists insist would be ruinously expensive. Mitterrand also worries that the prospect of such sweeping nationalization will terrify small businessmen who have begun to support him.

Wages The Communists want to raise the minimum wage from $340 a month to $440, and standardize the work week at 40 hours. The Socialists agree with this in principle but argue that some limit must be put on the minimum wage or else the inflation resulting from the rise in wages could rob workers of any real gains. The Socialists also oppose a Communist proposal that the highest salaries in France should be no more than five times greater than the minimum wage. The chief target for such cuts would be middle-income families who have, until now, been converting in ever increasing numbers to the Socialist Party.

National Defense In 1972 all three left parties opposed a nuclear deterrent for France. Last May the Communists made an astonishing turnabout, proclaiming that they not only favored a nuclear force but wanted to modernize it. Of course, they added, French missiles should not be aimed at the Soviet Union and the East bloc alone but also at nations of the Atlantic Alliance, to which France belongs. Mitterrand has proposed that the question of France's maintaining a force de frappe be put to a referendum--a plan that the Communists strongly reject.

Whether or not the leftist parties can resolve their differences, there are already some critical analyses of what the common program would do to the French economy. For one thing, there would be the familiar stultifying effects of nationalization and egalitarian pay policies. Moreover, according to a recent study by Eurofinance, a Paris-based research firm whose shareholders include leading European and U.S. banks, the left is unlikely to do much better than Giscard's government in solving France's economic problems. If the common program were enacted, the study argues, the program's large wage increases, combined with price freezes, would increase workers' buying power. But there would also be a shortage of consumer goods, a slowdown of housing construction and a drop in capital investment. Moreover, it would be far too expensive for a leftist government to end unemployment by creating 1.5 million new jobs.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.