“There is nothing to be controversial about”, declares Thursday, November 3 on franceinfo Philippe Ballard, spokesperson for the RN and deputy for Oise. He was seated right next to Grégoire de Fournas in the hemicycle, at the origin of the racist remarks which are controversial. The MP believes that “to apologize for something that was not said” is “lunar”. According to him, his RN colleague was talking about the boat that rescues migrants and not the rebellious elected official.
>> Racist remarks to the Assembly: follow our live
franceinfo: Marine Le Pen denounces a crude policy of opponents of the RN, are you saying the same thing?
Philippe Ballard: Yes. I was in the front row. I think they [les députés insoumis] understood very well what my colleague from Gironde was saying. The question was about this boat which goes to the Mediterranean to pick up migrants and which makes the bed and the game of the mafias.
This boat picks up, and that’s a good thing, people who are sometimes lost, sometimes not, in the Mediterranean. The people who work there take care of them and give them food, which is completely normal, but afterwards – and this is our political program – we are in favor of managing migratory flows. So this boat’s vocation is not to set a course towards the north and towards Europe, but a course towards the south, that is to say: Tunisia, Libya. Countries where most of these people come from, so in Africa. It’s not more complicated than that.
“There is nothing to be controversial about. It is our electoral program that led Marine Le Pen to the second round of the presidential election and to have 89 deputies in the National Assembly.”
Philippe Ballard, deputy RNon franceinfo
You will not apologize for this sentence which may have shocked?
Apologize for what? This sentence should not shock. It is about a boat that must return to Africa having rescued, fed and cared for people. I can tell you that my colleague from Gironde did not immediately understand what was happening. I have done nearly 40 years of journalism and I have followed parliamentary life a little. I said to him: “Don’t worry, they have found a bone to gnaw on, they will fix it as they please, it will go up for a few hours and it will come down just as dry.” And that is exactly what will happen.
Apologizing for something that has not been said I find that a bit lunar. Afterwards, for my colleague from the RN to contact our colleague LFI to explain himself and to bring all this to its proper proportion, it is easily possible.
Should we avoid calling out on the fly off the microphone to a colleague who is speaking on the microphone?
If you follow the debates since July in the National Assembly, it happens morning, noon and evening. This is not invective, it is just a reminder of our very firm migration policy. Moreover, when you have a Renaissance deputy who makes a Nazi salute in the hemicycle and who is not sanctioned, if there were sanctions taken there would be double standards. My colleague did not fire the rebellious MP because of his skin color. It is neither xenophobic nor racist.
Tomorrow, the office of the Assembly will meet at 2:30 p.m., if sanctions are taken, how will you react?
If for a sentence that has no consequence, except to develop a little common sense and promote a firm and human migration policy, there were sanctions, we could consider that there are perhaps two weights, two measures.