Higher education and research, François Ruffin
Access to higher education: Abolish Parcoursup
Direction of change: change of another kind, or uncertain direction, compared with current law.
The lever. Rules for entering higher education after the baccalauréat: allocation platform (Parcoursup), selection, places available. Direction rule: ↑ stricter selection.
« Je demande la suppression de Parcoursup. Non seulement c'est un algorithme qui gère ça, mais en plus il n'y a pas de réponse quand on n'est pas content des décisions qui sont prises. »1Translation by the editorsI call for the abolition of Parcoursup. Not only is it an algorithm that manages it, but on top of that there is no answer when you are not happy with the decisions that are taken.
Words of François Ruffin, franceinfo, « L’invité politique » de la Matinale, 9 October 2026. Position taken from public statements, not from a written programme.
Encoding
No cost-schedule parameter for this position: see the costing for the reason.
Costing
Announced by the candidate
not announced
The cited source does not cost this measure.
Published costings
none
No external costing of this position recorded to date.
Our calculation
lever that cannot be costed
Lever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Current law, sources and limits of the cost schedule
Current law. Loi ORE of 2018: Parcoursup. Non-selective bachelor's programmes (licences) may answer « oui si » [“yes, if”]; master's programmes have been selective since 2017.
Horizon. Not applicable.
Limits. Abolishing or tightening selection costs nothing in itself. However, a promise of additional places has a cost, which depends on the cost per student (not sourced here); it is costed only if a candidate announces a number of places.
- Sénat, avis PLF 2026 Recherche et enseignement supérieur, 2025-11: « 18,8 milliards d'euros prévus sur les programmes 150 « Formations supérieures et recherche universitaire » et 231 « Vie étudiante » »
How to read these amounts. These are static costs and revenues, with no feedback effect, over a full year: nothing on growth, employment or the revenue that economic activity would gain or lose. A higher net cost does not on its own make a worse policy, nor net savings a better one: each programme rests on an economic model (demand-led stimulus, lower compulsory levies, consolidation of the public accounts…) that the cost schedule does not settle. GDP itself measures a volume of activity, not well-being or the usefulness of what is produced. Economic models and feedback effects.
- franceinfo, « L’invité politique » de la Matinale, 9 October 2026. Words of François Ruffin. Position taken from public statements, not from a written programme. Read the source (franceinfo, « L’invité politique » de la Matinale).
Contest this encoding (prefilled email; procedure and deadlines)