Propelled to number 2 on the Republicans' list for the European elections, Céline Imart, a committed farmer and political novice, embodies the rise of an emerging generation from civil society. In this exclusive interview with Entrevue, she offers a frank and uncompromising look at the motivations for her commitment, her vision of Europe, while addressing the reasons that led Les Républicains not to support Ursula Von Der Leyen, despite his affiliation to the EPP, just like them.
Interview: We don't know much about you, Céline Imart, you are new to politics. What are your values?
Celine Imart : The roots, the commitment and the defense of what we called France below at the time. It is for these reasons that I got involved.
You are now number 2 on the Republican list for these European elections, to which right do you belong?
Economically, I belong to the liberal right, but I identify with the social right. I want to fight for people.
How did you end up being propelled to number 2 on this list?
It's very simple, the president of the Republicans, Éric Ciotti, called me one day to ask me to get involved in the European election campaign. I had met him several times at events like the farmer's show. This is also how I met François-Xavier Bellamy. It is quite common for politicians to come and talk to agricultural unionists. As part of my union duties, I met and interacted with all the political parties and I quickly realized that the party with which I had the most common values was LR.
Is this your first partisan commitment?
Yes, this is my first political commitment. I made contributions to the programs of the last presidential election. Xavier Bertrand and Valérie Pécresse, but I was called upon as an agricultural practitioner.
So you supported Xavier Bertrand in the Republican primary and then Valérie Pécresse in the presidential election?
Yes, absolutely.
With your professional background and your past commitments, you are naturally sensitive to the agricultural issue. How can the European Union be useful to farmers?
Europe is fundamental today for our farmers, but the problem is bureaucracy. I am deeply European and I think that agriculture needs Europe. Europe's problem is that in the way it operates, it is today in a bureaucratic frenzy that regulates. The “P” in CAP (common agricultural policy) has disappeared and we are no longer in a policy with a strategic vision. The European Commission must stop being a standard-producing machine. To be useful to farmers, Europe must get out of this normative and bureaucratic madness.
How to strengthen food security and promote sustainable agriculture in Europe?
There are two big problems that prevent our agriculture from fulfilling this role. We have a problem of lack of competitiveness, that is to say that the cost of labor is too high, there are regulatory overtranspositions which mean that what is prohibited in our country is authorized in our neighbors, water policies… The Republicans are proposing a competitiveness shock, we must lower production costs, the mental and financial costs of the standard. We advocate a normative pause.
As a farmer, have these standards caused you any concerns?
It's a crossroads, there are so many standards at different levels: European, national, regional, departmental... There is always the fear of making a mistake or being in the wrong. Today, when a farmer receives a controller, there is naturally a fear that is created. Moreover, farmers are not calling for an end to controls, but for these controls to be primarily educational and improvement driven.
You claim to be deeply European, but doesn't a powerful Europe rhyme with a weakened France?
This is precisely our difference with the Macronists. Their line and their slogan is “need for Europe”. They need Europe to hide France's failings. We know that today, the euro acts as a shield against this vicious spiral of inflation, increasing debt, lack of productivity, etc. Being in a monetary union protects us from catastrophe. Our vision is not to say: today, we need more Europe to overcome French problems. No, France must be much stronger to have influence in a Europe which must be much more political and much less bureaucratic.
You say you do politics to change people's lives. Do you think that Europe can change the lives of the French?
I think yes. Just by taking a normative break, we can make life easier for the French on many things. On very specific points, we can be useful to the French. If we strengthen the powers of Europol, we fight against drug trafficking, for example.
Specifically on security, how does your party intend to address questions of immigration and security at European level?
Today there is massive immigration, whether illegal or legal, which is uncontrolled. We are proposing, at the national level, a constitutional reform because the representatives of the nation have the right to decide on what immigration we want to welcome; we must take control of our destiny. At European level, we support the principle of the double border: there must be control, both at national and European level. We also aim to restore, for new arrivals, visa applications from their place of origin. We are obviously opposed to the compulsory relocation of migrants on European territories. There are now proven links between immigration and security, but security encompasses broader issues such as drug trafficking and the explosion of violence. It is necessary to act on a cultural level by restoring the conditions for exercising authority at school, for example, but we also need effective justice with a strong criminal response. People today are not afraid of going to prison, which have become real Club Meds.
The Republicans are credited with around 7%, your candidate in the presidential election made less than 4%, and you lost a third of your deputies in 2022. What failed and how did you get there?
I don't know how we got here, I'm new to politics and so I don't have all this history. I think there are a lot of people disappointed with Sarkozysm. Sarkozysm is not my assessment, like everything that happened between 2007 and 2012. But I got involved with LR, because there is conviction, clarity, proposal, idea , coherence and I think that, at some point, the French are not crazy, they will realize that we really have things to say between this self-installed duel between Macronie and the RN, we embody the third way.
Nicolas Sarkozy Was he a good president?
I don't remember, I was too young. (Laughs)
The Republicans say that Ursula Von Der Leyen is not the LR candidate, but she is a member of the EPP like LR. Is this a surprising situation?
Yes, indeed, but in 2019 our candidate was Manfred Weber, Ursula Von der Leyen was the candidate ofEmmanuel Macron. Besides, she went to the Renaissance congress in Bordeaux last September. She was the one who betrayed her own camp, she governed for 5 years and can now thank the Macronists. But I am not sure that she will be designated as the EPP candidate, at least for our part, we will not support her.
Will the Republicans leave the EPP if Ursula Von Der Leyen is named EPP candidate?
I don't know, because we haven't considered this possibility to date. We will do everything to ensure that she is not re-elected. We are at home, we are a center-right party, it is Ursula Von Der Leyen who betrayed her convictions by governing with Renew, it is not up to us to leave the EPP but up to her not to be nominated by the EPP.
You declared during your campaign launch meeting that you had never voted for Emmanuel Macron, did you vote for Marine Le Pen ?
No more.
Comments collected by Radouan Kourak
