One had to dare. Faced with a heatwave that is dampening consumption, the response found by the State is neither a plan for adapting businesses to the heat, nor a reflection on working hours during periods of thermal peaks, nor even a symbolic gesture towards the climate: it is an extension of the sales period. A purely commercial fix for a problem that, year after year, ceases to be an exceptional meteorological hazard to become a structural component of our summers. We have lost count of the heatwave episodes France has experienced in recent years, and yet the political response remains the same each time: a short-term regulatory adjustment, made in urgency, without ever tackling the fundamental issue.

An Implicit Hierarchy of Priorities

This choice is not insignificant. It reveals an implicit hierarchy of priorities that has guided French public action for years: when it comes to arbitrating between supporting immediate consumption and undertaking structural transformation in the face of climate change, the former systematically wins out. It is simpler, faster, more politically consensual - no one openly opposes an extension of sales, whereas any restrictive measure related to climate adaptation inevitably encounters categorical, employer, or union opposition. The result: the symptom is treated - the drop in shop attendance - without ever addressing the cause, this heat that discourages travel, exhausts employees, and endangers the most vulnerable.

The Invisible Cost of Non-Decision

The worst part is that this non-decision has a cost that is not immediately visible in commercial figures, but which will be paid later, and at a higher price. Every summer where the choice is made to extend a commercial calendar rather than invest in adapting buildings, transport, and working conditions to the heat, it is a summer of accumulated delay on a transition that knows no summer break. The majority of retailers themselves are not mistaken: several voices in the sector have pointed out that extending sales does not solve the underlying problem of consumption being slowed by the heat. The effect is treated, never the cause.

A Divide That Invades the 2027 Election

This same week, the nascent electoral debate surrounding the 2027 presidential election illustrates the extent to which this issue remains politically explosive. On one side, a line that favors a return to work and growth; on the other, voices demanding that the fight against global warming and the protection of the most precarious finally become the absolute priority, even if it means breaking with the logic of infinite growth. This divide is not new, but it takes on a particular intensity when it is played out, concretely, on the very prosaic question of whether to extend a sales calendar rather than engage in fundamental reflection on the country's adaptation to heat.

A Demand for Coherence

Let's be clear: no one is asking the State to solve climate change in one summer. But it is legitimate to expect, from public authorities, a minimum of coherence between the diagnosis - increasingly frequent and intense heatwave episodes - and the response provided - a purely commercial calendar adjustment. As long as this coherence is lacking, each new heatwave will give rise to the same reflex: a circumstantial gesture, followed by months of silence on the real adaptation issues, until the next heatwave.