Our mapping of confined freedoms provides a weekly updated overview of nearly 54 restrictions on fundamental rights and freedom adopted by the French state during the Covid-19 epidemy.
Check out our tool (in French)
Without questioning the very principle of restricting individual freedoms in certain circumstances, this tool is aimed at raising awareness on two issues.
The first one is that any restriction on rights and freedoms should be fully justified and, most importantly, proportionate. It is up to the government to explain why fighting the virus without these restrictive measures would be impossible or hardly doable.
With this mapping, we shall make sure that every suspended freedoms are indeed restored at one point.
The second one is that there is a tendency to strengthen the power of the state in the wake of any crisis and to turn temporary restrictive measures into lasting ones. Some measures taken in the context of the state of emergency following the 2015 terrorist attacks have been enshrined in law in 2017.
Our mapping focuses on measures implemented by the state at a national level with regard to four main areas: rule of law and democracy, civil liberties, economic freedoms and labour laws.
We assign to each measure a certain level of enforceability, falling into three categories: full effective, partly revoked, revoked.
The Mapping of confined freedoms is meant to be a civic and participative instrument. It aims to inform the general public and to help anyone who wishes to get a clearer picture of the current situation. It is open to any commentaries and suggestions.
To this day, GenerationLibre records 4 (-8) measures in effect, 0 (-3) measures partly revoked, 50 (+11) measures revoked.
Last update : 16/09/2022 at 15:15
Check out our tool (in French)
The European debate around the posted workers directive is taking place between those advocating a revision (Western Europe) and those in favour of the status quo (Central and Eastern Europe).
What’s at stake? The revision of the posted workers directive could align the wage levels of posted workers with those of local workers.
While some social concerns are sincere, it’s hard to hide the true reasons behind the hostility towards posted workers which include, among others, an explicit refusal of competition and latent xenophobia. Repeated criticism towards posted workers are economically misleading and socially counterproductive.
The status of posted workers was long disputed but an awkward political consensus has emerged against it during the French presidential campaign.
It is necessary to deconstruct certain fantasies around this issue. For example, the difference between the cost of a local worker and that of a posted one isn’t that significant. Also, posted workers bare little responsibility for the high French unemployment rate.
Reforming the status of posted workers to align their wages with those of local workers could only lead to their exclusion from the labour market and sideline their companies which are based in central and eastern European countries.
This form of labour mobility constitutes an effective example of indirect solidarity in Europe. A rigorous application of the existing rules is more necessary than a complete reform which could kill a driver of bottom-up intra-European solidarity.
