Former Socialist presidential candidate Ségolène Royal tops a new poll asking French people to name the most irritating politicians.

"/> Former Socialist presidential candidate Ségolène Royal tops a new poll asking French people to name the most irritating politicians.

" />
SHARE
COPY LINK

DOMINIQUE STRAUSS-KAHN

Most annoying politicians named in poll

Former Socialist presidential candidate Ségolène Royal tops a new poll asking French people to name the most irritating politicians.

Most annoying politicians named in poll
Guillaume Paumier

Royal, who got 68 percent of the votes, was closely followed by former IMF boss Dominique Strauss-Kahn (64 percent) and Green party presidential candidate Eva Joly (63 percent). The poll was carried out for VSD magazine by Harris Interactive.

Ségolène Royal was the Socialist party’s presidential candidate in 2007 when she lost to Nicolas Sarkozy.

She took part in a party contest in October to be the Socialist candidate in next year’s presidential election, finishing fourth out of six candidates. The battle was won by her former partner François Hollande.

Strauss-Kahn was once tipped to be the likely Socialist candidate in the upcoming election and polls gave him a clear lead over President Sarkozy.

Those prospects collapsed after he was arrested over the sexual assault of a hotel worker in New York in May. Strauss-Kahn was subsequently cleared of the charges.

Norwegian-born Eva Joly, who was a leading anti-corruption judge in the 1990s, became the Green party’s presidential candidate in July.

She is known for her outspoken views, most recently calling far-right Front National leader Marine Le Pen the daughter of a “torturer.”

Le Pen’s father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, was the founder and leader of the party until January 2011 and previously served in the French Foreign Legion.

President Nicolas Sarkozy finished fourth in the poll, followed closely by Marine Le Pen.

twitter.com/matthew_warren

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.

ECONOMY

World unprepared for next financial crisis: ex-IMF chief Strauss-Kahn

The world is less well equipped to manage a major financial crisis today than it was a decade ago, according to Dominique Strauss-Kahn, a former chief of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

World unprepared for next financial crisis: ex-IMF chief Strauss-Kahn
Former French Economy Minister and former managing director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) Dominique Strauss-Kahn , poses during a photo session in Paris on Thursday. Photo: JOEL SAGET / AFP
In an interview with AFP, the now-disgraced Strauss-Kahn — who ran the fund at the height of the 2008 financial meltdown — also said rising populism across the world is a direct result of the crisis. 
 
Strauss-Kahn resigned as head of the IMF in 2011 after being accused of attempted rape in New York, although the charges were later dropped. He settled a subsequent civil suit, reportedly with more than $1.5 million.
 
Q: When did you become aware that a big crisis was brewing?
 
A: When I joined the IMF on Nov 1, 2007, it became clear quite quickly that things were not going well. That is why in January 2008, in Davos, I made a statement that made a bit of noise, asking for a global stimulus package worth two percent of each country's GDP. In April 2008, during the IMF's spring meetings, we released the figure of $1,000 billion that banks needed for their recapitalisation.
 
Q: Did the Bush administration grasp the danger of Lehman Brothers going bankrupt?
 
A: No, and that is why Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson decided not to save Lehman, because he wanted to make an example of it in the name of moral hazard. Like everybody else, he considerably underestimated the consequences. Allowing Lehman to go under was a serious mistake. Especially because only a week later they were forced to save the insurer AIG, which was much bigger.
 
Q: Ten years on, are we better equipped to deal with a crisis of such a magnitude?
 
A: No. We have made some progress, particularly in the area of banks' capital adequacy ratios. But that is not nearly enough. Imagine Deutsche Bank suddenly finding itself in difficulty. The eight percent of capital it has at its disposal are not going to be enough to solve the problem. The truth is that we are less well prepared now. Regulations are insufficient.
 
Q: How so?
 
A: After 2012-2013 we stopped talking about the need to regulate the economy, for example concerning the size of banks, or concerning rating agencies. We backtracked, which is why I am pessimistic about our preparedness. We have a non-thinking attitude towards globalisation and that does not yield positive results.
 
Q: Do we still have international coordination?
 
A: Coordination is mostly gone. Nobody plays that role anymore. Not the IMF and not the EU, and the United States president's policies are not helping. As a result, the mechanism that was created at the G20, which was very helpful because it involved emerging countries, has fallen apart. Ten years ago, governments accepted leaving that role to the IMF. I'm not sure it is able to play it today, but the future will tell.
 
Q: Do you believe that Donald Trump's election is a consequence of the crisis?
 
A: I believe so. I'm not saying that there was a single reason for Trump's election, but today's political situation is not unconnected to the crisis we lived through, both in the US with Trump and in Europe.
 
Q: Connected how?
 
A: One of the consequences of the crisis has been completely underestimated, in my opinion: the populism that is appearing everywhere is the direct outcome of the crisis and of the way that it was handled after 2011/2012, by favouring solutions that were going to increase inequalities.
 
Quantitative easing (by which central banks inject liquidity into the banking system) was useful and welcome. But it is a policy that is basically designed to bail out the financial system, and therefore serves the richest people on the planet.
 
When there's a fire, firemen intervene and there is water everywhere. But then you need to mop up, which we didn't do. And because this water flowed into the pockets of some, and not of everyone, there was a surge in inequality.
 
By AFP's Antonio Rodriguez