“we are a party of the people, so why not”
Workers and pensioneers rights act of 2021
Rationale
These changes strengthen worker protections, housing affordability, retirement security, and financial stability for public benefit.
Proposed Changes
| Law | Previous | Proposed | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rent Control |
Light stabilisation, mostly market rents
|
Hard caps on rents
|
|
| 2 | Right to Strike |
Banned/limited in essential services
|
Protected with a lawful ballot
|
|
| 3 | Retirement Age Policy |
Retirement at 65
|
Retirement at 60
|
|
| 4 | Banking & Financial Regulation |
Deregulated financial centre
|
Strong prudential oversight
|
1
Rent Control2
Right to Strike3
Retirement Age Policy4
Banking & Financial RegulationProposer
Party
Peoples Ecosocialist Union
The Peoples Ecosocialist Union plants justice where greed once grew reaping shared harvests from a living world.
Core pillars
Mathis Garnier
Activist · Age 58
A former investigative journalist turned political operator, Mathis Garnier built his reputation by leaking scandals and spinning narratives, using his razor-sharp media instincts to elevate allies and dismantle opponents with surgical precision.
Timeline
-
Draft19 October 2021
-
Vote Open7 March 2022
-
Vote Closed6 May 2022
-
Did Not Become Law6 May 2022
Vote tally
Live tally across each chamber. Weighted by seats held.
Senate
FailedFor: 90 / 348 seats (25.9%)
Against: 185 · Abstained: 0 · Not voted: 73
| Party | Seats | Vote | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Libertarian League | 0 | No | We oppose this bill because it replaces voluntary market decisions with government mandates. |
| Monarchists | 0 | Yes | we are a party of the people, so why not |
| Patriotic Alternative | 0 | No | That's the economic thinking of a child. We and our constituents are very much against this blatantly absurd proposal. |
| Peoples Ecosocialist Union Proposer | 90 | Yes | No reason given |
| Renaissance | 185 | No | retirement age of 60 is too low when life expectancy is 80+. is it sustainable to retire for 20 years? |
| Empty seats | 125 | Not voted |
National Assembly
FailedFor: 176 / 577 seats (30.5%)
Against: 332 · Abstained: 0 · Not voted: 69
| Party | Seats | Vote | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Libertarian League | 92 | No | We oppose this bill because it replaces voluntary market decisions with government mandates. |
| Monarchists | 46 | Yes | we are a party of the people, so why not |
| Patriotic Alternative | 79 | No | That's the economic thinking of a child. We and our constituents are very much against this blatantly absurd proposal. |
| Peoples Ecosocialist Union Proposer | 130 | Yes | No reason given |
| Renaissance | 161 | No | retirement age of 60 is too low when life expectancy is 80+. is it sustainable to retire for 20 years? |
| Empty seats | 240 | Not voted |
Presidency
FailedFor: 0 / 1 seats (0.0%)
Against: 1 · Abstained: 0 · Not voted: 0
| Party | Seats | Vote | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Renaissance | 1 | No | No reason given |
Voting record
Every vote must state a public reason. Most recent first.
“We oppose this bill because it replaces voluntary market decisions with government mandates.”
“That's the economic thinking of a child. We and our constituents are very much against this blatantly absurd proposal.”
“retirement age of 60 is too low when life expectancy is 80+. is it sustainable to retire for 20 years?”