The collective Nos Services publics wants more rules on the use of consulting firms. This practice was pinned by the Court of Auditors on Monday.
“There is a need for rules on the use of consulting firms and fewer constraints on the recruitment of colleagues”, summarizes this Monday on franceinfo the spokesperson for the collective Our public services, Arnaud Bontemps.
The Court of Auditors accuses the State on Monday of letting these private service providers fulfill missions falling under the “core business of the administration” and asks him to clarify the rules governing their use “inappropriate”. “Certain rules prevent the State from recruiting, but authorize it to write a check to a firm”, deplores Arnaud Bontemps who therefore hopes for a “rebalancing in the years to come”.
Franceinfo: Are you surprised by these conclusions of the Court of Auditors?
Arnaud Bontemps: They are not absolutely new. There was already real knowledge by public opinion of this very strong increase in the use of consulting firms. The Court of Auditors puts them at 875 million euros per year for the year 2021 alone. So, obviously, it asks questions in terms of issues of transparency, control and in the capacities for the State to fulfill its missions. .
How to distinguish the good from the bad use of consulting firms?
The right recourse to consulting firms is a recourse that is chosen. And in fact, too often in the administration, we have no choice. Since 2006, certain standards have been engraved in the budgetary rules which prevent the manager of the State from recruiting a colleague, but which authorizes him to write a check to a consulting firm. In fact, what the Court of Auditors points to and what the Senate already pointed to is the fact that the use of consulting firms has too often become a reflex.
Who has this reflex? Is it directly the minister, his cabinet or the administrations?
It is very variable. Most often, it does not go up to the ministerial level. These are managers who are taken by constraint. It has often been a culture, saying that the private sector would ultimately do better than the public, would therefore cost less, be more flexible and more competent.
Where is the right balance between what you are asking for, more flexibility for the administrations, and the Court of Auditors which is asking for more rules?
I think it’s really both and it’s not incompatible at all. We need rules on the use of consulting firms and, conversely, we need fewer constraints on the recruitment of colleagues. It is therefore a balance between the two which, clearly, has leaned too much in favor of consulting firms to the detriment of public services and which should be rebalanced in the years to come.