It cannot continue this economic nonsense

We are both the same program. It will be to choose one that will best embody this project. My strengths, I believe, based on my journey and the fighting I have done. I enjoyed both of institutional political experience as Chair of the Development Committee at the European Parliament, which is continued in my experience with the Norwegian development agency, I have three election campaigns in my assets (European, regional and cantonal).

I think precisely that better pedagogy for the ecological transformation of the economy is to conduct fighting, say the choice before us, I am not confusing pedagogy and demagogy.Our proposals are innovative, they often face acquired positions. Thus, the moratorium on GMOs would have never been achieved without the action of NGOs and personalities like José Bové, head of the "reapers". Policy, are the clear choice. Cannot change the world without determination as if it were sufficient to love one another and others.

It is important to decide politically out of nuclear power. This means not to build new reactors and close the oldest requiring heavier investments. Should be the latest plants to go until the end of their operation - 30 years - and take this time to develop a real sector of renewable energies. Nuclear power is an economic error. No other country in the world not relied as much to this energy.

Contrary to a widespread idea, only renewable energy make us truly independent energy imports. Nuclear no since the due of this, pas not le nucléaire n' puisque la le doit du Ce, pas le nucléaire n' puisque la le doit du Ce, pas le est la le puisque la le importer is la le est la le puisque la le importer puisque la le importer puisque la le puisque la le importer import uranium that it uses and that it is also d'une fossil energy which we harness not cost. Moreover, the nuclear power does us not from imports of electricity: the France is importing net electricity consumption peak

Finally, it is wrong to say that the cost of the KWh of nuclear origin is cheaper. To achieve the same level of heating, people equipped with electric heaters require a greater amount of energy. Electricity supplied by the future EPR reactor, costs 60 euros the MWh. Wind power currently costs 65 euros the MWh. However the cost of this energy decline while that of nuclear will rise due to including new security measures that the France will need to take. The price asked by EDF to consumers is a "political" award: it underestimates the cost of the dismantling of the facilities and storage. Finally, electric heating is responsible for a deep social injustice. Modest people, living in badly isolated housing have huge bills. Nuclear power is an absurdity which has cost, and is still expensive for the poor.

The President of the Republic promotes the French as nuclear industry as a leading-edge sector that the world want us. But, what are the prospects for Areva Talking about five reactors to be built in the world each year. If a hypothesis of EUR 4 billion per reactor, this is a market of 20 billion euros. It is therefore a very small market. That renewable energy is estimated at 200 billion euros. It would be really stupid to rely on a technology of the last century.

If I am the candidate of the environmentalists, nuclear power will be the cornerstone of a possible agreement with the PS. It cannot continue this economic nonsense. I will make a such score, that PS will have no choice but to take our proposals! And if the PS candidate gives no on this question, then I predict that it will be behind me in the first round!

Ecological conversion is highly creative job. In Germany, 270,000 jobs have been created by the development of renewable energy and is expected 500,000 by 2020. One can think that the number will be comparable in France if it leads new policies. A compare with 50,000 jobs related to the nuclear sector. Also, these jobs will be kept until the end of this industry and disbanded for decades, approximately seventy years.

Another example of ecological conversion: the know-how of the Saint-Nazaire shipyards could be used in the manufacturing of wind turbines. Strengthen the insulation of buildings could create four times more jobs for the same turnover as the development of the gas sector which is largely based on the import of raw material. The development of the industrial sector of renewable energy will support the economic activity of SMEs innovative, more creative of employment and more citizens than the multinationals.

The CAC 40 companies pay only 8 tax on average against 26 for SMEs. We propose a different tax rates depending on the size and the use of profits between the remuneration of shareholders and the investment. There is not that the industry is concerned with the ecological conversion.

We support local agriculture, only able to feed humanity while creating jobs. This return to a peasant agriculture that may occur with the review of the CAP in 2013, could generate up to 1 million jobs in Europe.

We wish a great reform of the French tax system: it is very unfair because, proportionally, the rich pay less than the middle classes. The need for financing of ecological conversion is evaluated by the European Commission to 2.5 of GDP, or around EUR 50 billion per year. In these 50 billion, 15 billion should be public investment because they will be never profitable.

To finance we will delete also 10 billion unecological tax niches, such as the VAT reduced pesticide, such as the exemption from VAT on the kerosene used on domestic flights or the agrifuels subsidies. We will also remove the VAT reduced on the restoration, the exemption from tax on overtime. Finally to finance the balance we will put in place a climate energy contribution.

But the State must fund not everything! It is not the taxpayer to pay the House of Madame Bettencourt insulating! We will combine this policy to a policy of standards: for example, an assignment of property may be made if the insulation work are not carried out. We are going to "steer" a part of the savings to fund these projects. Dominique Strauss-Kahn, when he was Minister for the economy, had imposed in the life a part dedicated to SMEs. Could take this idea and require insurers to invest in green investment financially profitable through energy savings.

It is an imperative, but it must be careful to not break our economy and our social model by too rapid and too brutal method of reduction of deficits. I am opposed to deletions of expenses related to public services and in particular to the rule of the non-replacement of a start in retirement on two for officials. With this method, it does that break utilities to save only EUR 400 million per year.

I propose making a fairer tax system, to gradually return to the tax rate that was ours in 2000, i.e. before the left and then the right decide of the tax cuts that were used to. We thus récupérerions 100 billion of tax revenues which have largely benefited the rich. A serious fight against evasion in tax havens will retrieve an important part of the 20 to 30 billion annual revenue for the State. And a European tax on financial transactions will approximately ten billion per year in the France.

Should be back on reform Woerth and restored the legal age of retirement at age 60. But I support a more flexible system, for a start in 55 years for those who have started to work young or who exercise a painful trade, or at age 65 for those who wish to. As in Norse times the it also applies to allow a gradual work countries les scandinaves retired. Will everyone be in focus better.

FOLDER