World: Premier Barre Defends His Record

He fears the “ruinous consequences” of a leftist victory

By any measure, Raymond Barre, 53, is an unlikely man to be leading the center-right coalition’s battle to retain power in France. Author of the standard economics textbook used in French schools and a former vice president of the Common Market, Barre was virtually unknown in his own country until President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing named him Premier in August 1976. The roly-poly professor, who describes himself as a “square man in a round body,” enjoys the fact that he is not a professional politician. His blunt, straight-talking manner has won him the respect of the public, though his austere economics have drawn criticism from both the left and from Gaullists on the right. Barre’s policies, however, have lately begun to bear fruit: unemployment has declined for five consecutive months, the annual inflation rate has averaged only 7% over the past six months, France’s trade deficit has been halved, and the franc, in spite of a brief attack in early February, has risen against the dollar.

In an interview last week with TIME’S Paris bureau chief, Henry Muller, Barre vigorously defended his record and attacked the left’s Common Program. Highlights from the interview:

Q. The polls all seem to show that a majority of Frenchmen want a change of government, and that they want to elect the left. What is causing this desire for change?

A. All the polls indicate that the opposition enjoys a lead of a few points. But when one asks the French if they want the present majority to form the next government, the answer is largely affirmative. There are at the present time many contradictory attitudes among the French. What seems important to me is that overwhelmingly the French who are asked about their attachment to the type of society we have at present give an affirmative response. Moreover, other polls show that the voters place more confidence for the management of their economy in the present government than in the opposition. A poll in the [leftist weekly] Nouvel Observateur indicates that I lead Mr. Mitterrand by twelve points on confidence in the management of the economy and, still more interesting, that I even lead him among those earning the minimum wage.

Q. What would France be like if the left came to power?

A. First of all, a victory by the opposition would mean the loss in a few months of all the economic results achieved over 20 years. No objective observer can believe that the policies inspired by the Common Program and planned by the leaders of the opposition would not have ruinous consequences for the French economy. The Socialists can obviously engage in doubletalk, making demagogic promises and then letting it be known that they are the best rampart against Communism. But if the promises made by Mr. Mitterrand are fulfilled in the first weeks following an opposition victory, and if the first session of the new National Assembly is devoted to nationalization of a large number of French companies, it would mean inflation, an increased trade deficit, depreciation of the franc, and the disorganization of production at a time when we need to produce and to export.

Second, the opposition’s arrival to power would mean political impotence inside the country. It is hard to see how a government composed of Socialists and Communists, who have shown over the past few weeks that they cannot agree on the essentials and that they distrust each other, could govern France effectively. We should not forget, moreover, that the Communist Party possesses a powerful link, the C.G.T. [the Communist trade union], and that it would not fail with the backing of this union labor to place itself in a position of strength in relation to the Socialists.

Finally, such a victory would call into question France’s role in Europe and in the world, because an economically weakened and politically impotent country would have no weight in international discussions.

Q. Let’s talk about your economic policies. Both the opposition and some factions within the majority—the Gaullists—accuse you of having enacted an economic policy that has led to an increase in unemployment…

A. Listen! Do you want to ask me questions about stupidities? You just have to look at the figures, you just have to look at the evolution of France in 1977 and compare it with 1975 and 1976, to ask why I was named Premier, and to see the results obtained in the matter of prices, unemployment and growth by the end of 1977. I’ve had enough of criticism that has nothing to do with facts and that is inspired purely by a spirit of systematic denigration. That’s all I have to say, and I won’t answer such questions any more.

Unemployment has declined. [It now stands at 1.02 million, or 4.6%, v. last August’s 1.22 million, or 5.5%.] We would have had a 16% inflation rate now if I hadn’t pursued the policies I did. Look at the evolution of prices at the end of 1977. Look at the decline in our balance of payments deficit. Look at the decline in our trade deficit.

Q. Why is it that in a country like France, the West’s fourth industrial power, the Communist Party remains so powerful?

A. I think the presence of the Communist Party can be explained by historic and sociocultural reasons. For one thing, there is the fact that the French economy remained relatively backward for many decades and that its profound transformation did not occur until after World War II. Moreover, there are in France dogmatic patterns of thought that are part of our national heritage and that are apparent on the right as well as on the left. Finally, there is within the intelligentsia, despite its declarations to the contrary, a certain inclination toward authoritarian forms of government, in one direction as well as the other.

All this explains why the Communist Party finds favorable ground in France. But I believe that as our country progresses economically and socially it will approach the situation of other Western countries. I would conclude that even though the Communist Party is strong in France, the French will never allow it to come to power. French dogmatism finds its limits in common sense.

The French want a free society, democratic pluralism, greater social justice, a continued effort for a better quality of life. They don’t want a society that is collectivist, planned, bureaucratic, that locks them into a political, social and economic iron collar. I don’t believe in the success of the Common Program, because I think its inspiration is profoundly contrary to the deep aspirations of the French. What I hope is that they realize it before and not after the elections. Because after the elections the damage will be considerable. And when the damage is done we’ll have to live with the consequences—and, believe me, it’s easier to go downhill than uphill.