C'est l'ancien premier ministre Michel Rocard qui a dégainé le premier dans le JDD le 26 janvier, proposant d'allonger à 43 ans la durée de cotisation, contre 41,5 actuellement. L'ancien premier secrétaire du PS Henri Emmanuelli lui a emboîté le pas mardi en déclarant au micro de France Info que "la biologie fait qu'il faut se poser la question de la durée de cotisation"All this is a bit disingenuous, since there has always been consensus in this wing of the party. It was the left of the PS that refused to go along. Hollande, as candidate, adroitly straddled the divide by agreeing with the principle of the Fillon-Woerth-Sarkozy reforms, that increased life expectancy required a longer period of contributions, while continuing to support the symbolic "legal retirement age" of 60--but only for those who had contributed the necessary number of quarters, which in practice meant only those who began work very early in life and never missed a quarter from the age of 17 or 18 on.
Now, if the required contribution period is lengthened even more, no one will be able to retire at 60 who has not begun work at 17 or even 16. Somehow one always knew that it would come to this, but presumably Hollande's hope is that by now the waters are so muddied that no one can possible blame him for turning the screw the next notch, tightening even more than Sarkozy.