Vaucluse - Department: debate and "Oh!"

When presenting a report as arid as the budgetary orientation of the Department, the rapporteur Jean-Baptiste Blanc benefits from two advantages. He was a teacher in tax law, and therefore knows, even with such a thankless subject, to be a pedagogue; and he is a lawyer, so he can defend any case. Yesterday morning, he made perfect use of these two assets to inform his colleagues on all sides of the draft 2022 budget before they were called upon to debate it.

As for defending, he does not spare himself: "The Vaucluse is in a financial situation that many departments would envy us". And to cite as an example the precautionary loan of €50 million contracted in 2020, which could have been criticized at the time, but which would have proved to be a winning bet, since it would have made it possible to cover the investments for 2020 and 2021, thus making it possible not to borrow in 2021 and to achieve, in addition, a saving of €50,000.

But the lawyer, in addition to defending, also knows how to be offensive, and announces that this budgetary "good health" will allow the mandate to be "marked with the seal of structuring investment" to which €140 million will be devoted per year (against €96 million during the previous mandate). These investments will, of course, cover a certain number of major works already mentioned here (decongestion of the Bonpas sector, Orange bypass, reconstruction of the MDPH, Dep. house for disabled people, college renovation plan, etc.). It will also involve continuing to support municipalities and EPCIs in their projects, combating medical desertification by financing 8 doctor's posts, contributing to the installation of video surveillance devices and equipping municipal police. And, good news, current music lovers will not be forgotten thanks to a large-scale festival which should be dedicated to them in the south of the department.

Kinda insane how much I just dont give a shit about whats canon anymore 😂 I'll take a show I like and come up with… https://t.co/rewSBbg1yl

- Laura! / wants himym & btvs moots Tue Jul 06 02:10:12 +0000 2021

Oppositions oppose

It's fair game, the oppositions have necessarily found fault with the project. Not on the form, of course, but on the bottom: lack of cycle paths except those with tourist vocation (for Myriam Silem, the councilor of Pernes); forgetting the word Ehpad, which would reflect a lack of interest in welcoming older people (according to André Castelli from Avignon 3); a "compelling need, after the health crisis, to redefine our vision of governance in the field of social justice" (Samir Allel, Avignon 1); a "campaign programme" marked by a "lack of budgetary dynamics" (according to Marie de Maleville, Carpentras); “a concern about the ability to reduce debt” (Yann Bompard, Orange) or even a situation which would be worrying about the lack of public housing and the “indecency” of certain private housing (Jean-François Lovisolo, Pertuis).

As many criticisms as President Santoni, the rapporteur Blanc, or the other advisers of the majority concerned by these areas have had difficulty digesting. Their answers will all go in the same direction: a feeling of injustice in the face of each of these observations perceived as so many condemnations without appeal. Whereas, precisely, retorted the carriers of the project, this one would take into account each of these aspects as rarely that had been done until then. Well, we will say that it was just a day "without".

Upset, Joris Hébrard (RN) leaves the assembly in rage

On what foot did Joris Hébrard get up yesterday morning? Because this Friday, the generally rather good-natured mayor of Pontet did not last more than half an hour before leaving with a bang the hemicycle of the Hôtel du Département where the plenary session was held. It is true that on several occasions, and sometimes with a certain harshness, he heard himself reproached for very badly wearing the mask which had become compulsory within the assembly. It is also true that the councilor and mayor of Le Pontet did not really do with finesse when responding to these remonstrances which grew more pronounced as the "student" Hébrard rebelled. First there was a remark from the president on the need to cover your face well, immediately followed by the claim, in a sneering tone from the Pontetian, to be “unvaccinated”. The answer will have had the gift of throwing a chill. Then the session resumed. Until the same President Santoni allowed a councilor to temporarily lower the mask which made her intervention inaudible. What irritate Joris Hébrard who felt targeted by a ban that was not applied to another adviser. The tone rose again, until Vice-President Lagneau pointed out to anti-vax activist Hébrard that as mayor he had to respect certain rules. Otherwise, he himself would one day have difficulty enforcing others when it would be his turn to ask his constituents to do so. And that, Joris Hébrard really did not appreciate. He therefore preferred to leave the room, arguing about his preserved freedom and the "dictatorship" which reigned in the room.