France ends health passes but maintains some border controls: new rules here

The French parliament on Tuesday adopted definitively by the Senate’s final vote, a bill that apparently ends health passes and other extraordinary measures against Covid-19 on August 1, but offers the possibility of a mandatory test. boundaries.

“This lesson is a necessary shield in the face of a COVID-19 pandemic that has not yet spoken its last word”, underlined Health Minister François Braun.

The first bill valid under the new legislature, the text was last voted on Monday by the National Assembly, in its version issued by the Senate and then approved by a joint committee of deputies and senators.

This marks the new parliamentary configuration that forces the government to seek agreements beyond a presidential majority, particularly with Les Republicans, the leading group in the Senate.

“In an unprecedented political situation”, it is “the result of a method” that “responds to two key words: dialogue and compromise without compromise”, the minister confirmed.

The Senate approved it by a vote of 209 to 30. En marche majority LR, centrist and RDPI groups voted overwhelmingly in favor of RDSE group with thumping majority. But 14 LR senators voted against it and 12 did not participate, with four presidents elected by majority vote.

The majority communist CRCE group voted against it. Ecologists and socialists abstained, while representatives of the PS voted for the text.

The Bill provides for express repeal with effect from August 1 of Emergency Arrangements – Management of State of Emergency and Health Crisis.

“In the event of a future health crisis, if the government requires extraordinary powers, it will have to negotiate one-on-one with Parliament,” said LR rapporteur Philip Bass.

The only reservation is that the government may, in very specific cases, impose a negative COVID screening test for foreign trips in the direction of French territory.

This travel health certificate can be activated for international travel only in case of a particularly dangerous type of COVID-19 outbreak in a country. or for visits to foreign communities in the event of a risk of hospital saturation.

“Free Field for Antivax”

Two points were discussed in particular: the age of application, from the age of 12, and in particular the fact that the senators only retained the negative screening test as a valid document. Exit certificate of vaccination or treatment.

The centrist Philippe Bonnecarre regretted that the text no longer contained “any reference to vaccination, a way of counter-messaging our fellow citizens”. “The debate leaves the field open to antivax,” said Veronique Guillotine (RDSE).

“I solemnly affirm that the vaccine is necessary because it reduces the severity of the disease and in some cases prevents catching it”, however, Mr Bass declared in an effort to downplay the criticism.

Another very controversial point is the question of reintegration of non-vaccinated caregivers. The Senate “made a way for the reunification” of suspended personnel, in the words of its rapprochement.

But for the socialist Marie-Pierre de la Gontry, the device “has been fully understood by those who are concerned and by antivax as the open door of this reunification would be as utterly shocking”.

On the other hand, CRCE Group President Iliane Asasi confirmed that “these personnel should be reinstated immediately”.

According to the text, vaccination obligations for caregivers will be suspended as soon as the higher health authority considers that, and non-vaccinated caregivers “reinstated immediately”.

In any case, it won’t be for tomorrow. The HAS took the lead on Friday, saying it was “in favor of maintaining the obligation to vaccinate against (Covid-19) for personnel working in health and medical-social establishments”.

Finally, the text SI-DEP and Contact makes it possible to expand the tools for monitoring the COVID pandemic.

Mr Bass hoped that work on the bill could “delineate a process in which the Senate as a whole plays its stabilizing role”.

In contrast, Ms de la Gontri decided that “the role of Parliament, and in particular the Senate, has been curtailed”. “There was no agreement, no dialogue, or at least only with certain groups in this gathering,” she lamented.