PLFR 2026: the government deplores the absence of a counterproposal after the rejection in Commission

The Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Planning reacted to the second rejection of the amended finance bill (Plfr) 2026 by the Finance and Budgetary Control Committee of the National Assembly, Friday October 30. In a press release published this Saturday, he deplored the absence of amendments or counterproposals from deputies, despite the clarifications provided.

The 2026 amending finance bill (Plfr) faces a second rejection in Commission. In response, the Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Planning indicates that it transmitted, on Friday October 30, a detailed document in response to the Commission’s memorandum, received on October 26, which identified the main concerns of the Pastef parliamentary group.

According to the ministry, several phases of discussions made it possible to provide answers to MPs’ questions, particularly on energy subsidies, family security grants and priority spending. The requested clarifications and supporting documents would also have been sent to parliamentarians to enable them to make an informed decision.

Despite these explanations, the Commission rejected the text. The ministry emphasizes that “to date, the Commission has not formulated any amendment or counter-proposal”, despite three discussion sessions.

Risks for the State treasury

The ministry recalls that an amending finance law makes it possible to adapt the budget to changes in available resources and expenses to be covered. In particular, it gives Parliament the possibility of approving the adjustments necessary to finance national priorities and respect the State’s commitments.

He also warns of the consequences of a prolongation of budgetary uncertainty. The rejection comes in a context marked by reduced room for maneuver, difficulties in accessing financial markets and ongoing negotiations with the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

According to the ministry, this situation could compromise the mobilization of the financing necessary to cover the resource needs for 2026 and increase tensions on the State treasury, to the detriment of priority expenditure and populations.

In view of the next plenary session devoted to the text, the ministry reaffirms its availability to continue discussions in a spirit of constructive and responsible dialogue. He calls on the various parties to prioritize “the sense of responsibility and the best interests of the populations” in order to achieve the adoption of Plfr 2026.

Salla GUEYE