There is little catchup sessions if not the EUR 1

Choice you think of des de Nicolas Sarkozy of Nicolas Sarkozy

95 of the recommendations of the Juppe-Rocard commission are taken. Consisting of logic to focus investment on growth sectors being - this sustainable and transformation of the economy is respected, and the financing of infrastructure - TGV, Grand Paris,..., is excluded, even if there were, no doubt, many departmental pressures. There is little catch-up sessions, if not the EUR 1.3 billion devoted to the campus plan, which should be the budget. I have one regret, but which is also valid for our work: the absence of European dimension, while it is at this scale that projects could be climb and that the Union has a real ability to borrow.

What do you think of the transformation of the ECA in Commissioner to atomic energy and alternative energy

We had this debate in the commission. The CEA is already other skills than nuclear power, such as solar energy. But we had opted for the gathering of skills on renewable energies in a new agency for energy, "borrowing" prerogatives of Ademe and the CEA. In terms of political view, it seems a bit complicated to place renewable energy under the label of the ECA.

This large, that some hoped more important, is sufficient

Need to invest for the future, not just this year, but every year. Nicolas Sarkozy said: the France is a chronic under-investment. Missing 1 or 2 points of GDP per year public investment or 20 to 40 billion euros. The response of the large loan is a cyclical response to a structural problem. It is better than nothing, but it is very insufficient. Take higher education: missing at least 20 billion euros of budget each year, compared to the United States. And we will give 10 billion endowments to universities, only once, on which they can use that 300 to 400 million of interest per year for their budget. 300 million extra per year, 30 billion of needs by year: we see the margin...

How can I identify more ways for the investment

We face to the paradox of under-investment that goes hand in hand with the debt overhang. This implies an absolutely massive reorientation of our public finances. Already be counterproductive decisions taken since 2007, such as Tepa (overtime, tax shield, etc.), that must cost term EUR 15 billion per year, and reduced VAT restoration (3 billion per year).

But should go further by truly reforming public policy. The RGPP tackles only the Organization and the savings are marginal. Why not return on the EUR 30 billion of relief of loads on the non-skilled jobs that right as Leftwards have accumulated for fifteen years, by redirecting to jobs of the future

Are you in favour of the establishment of a "golden rule" on the deficit

An interesting rule would be to prohibit the financing of operating deficit, as is already the case for local communities. But I think that beyond targets encrypted, serving to nothing because they are never respected, especially to establish binding procedures, like the Netherlands, who build their budget on the basis of pessimistic forecasts of growth. There may be then that good surprises.