The former Minister Delegate for Citizenship, interviewed on Wednesday morning, evacuated any personal responsibility in the “dysfunctions” of the management of the Marianne fund, in 2021.
“I do not shirk, I intend to take on my responsibility, all my responsibility, but only my responsibility.” Heard Wednesday, June 14 by the Senate commission of inquiry into the Marianne fund against separatism, Marlène Schiappa wanted to defend herself from the irregularities of which she is accused in this file. The former Minister in charge of Citizenship, at the initiative of this device launched after the assassination of Samuel Paty in October 2020, did not recognize personal errors, even if she conceded “malfunctions in the organization and management of the fund”. Franceinfo looks back on what to remember from this highly anticipated hearing to shed light on the mistakes of the Marianne fund.
The accelerated timetable for launching the fund would not have had an impact on the number of projects submitted
This is the first reproach that was made to Marlène Schiappa, on the chronological level. Responsible for setting up the Marianne fund, through the Interministerial Committee for the Prevention of Delinquency and Radicalization (CIPDR), the prefect Christian Gravel had pointed out to the senators a “political order, issued by the minister concerned”to launch this fund on an accelerated schedule.
“The three-week period for collecting applications, it is true that it may seem constrained, but it seemed appropriate to us. That we have 71 structures affected and who respond is a significant number. The short deadlines n didn’t seem to be a problem”defended Marlène Schiappa on Wednesday.
The rapporteur of the commission of inquiry, Jean-François Husson, for his part underlined the fact that the number of projects submitted was not very high. According to him, the results of the filing of files for the Marianne fund, in the spring of 2021, are “in halftone”. “There were a lot of offside responses”added Claude Raynal, president of the commission of inquiry.
Marlène Schiappa kept her distance from the selections of the fund, but was “informed” of the discussions
Then, did Marlène Schiappa intervene directly or indirectly in the process of selecting the 17 associations that received subsidies? What role did she play in the development of the Marianne collection? During her hearing, the current Secretary of State in charge of Associative Life insisted that she was not on the selection committee for the device. “On the other hand, I am regularly informed by my cabinet of the discussions which can exist around the attribution of the subsidies”, she clarified. It makes sense: half of this committee, that is three people, were members of his cabinet at the time. “They were capped” to decide on the beneficiary associations, insisted Marlène Schiappa.
She is not a “friend” of Mohamed Sifaoui, whose association received 355,000 euros
During a good part of the three hours of this hearing, Marlène Schiappa wanted to defend herself from the closeness that would have been hers with Mohamed Sifaoui. The latter co-directed the Union of Physical Education and Military Preparation Societies (USEPPM), which received 355,000 euros from the Marianne fund despite a file considered to be very weak. “I am not Mohamed Sifaoui’s girlfriendshe swept away. I am formal, (…) I have at no time requested or placed an order [pour] whether Mohamed Sifaoui is prioritized or put on top of the pile. I had no reason to do it and I didn’t.”
According to the former minister, “this file was supported by the administration” and therefore by the CIPDR, headed by Christian Gravel. The latter had underlined before the senators the ideological proximity between the former minister and the essayist. The ex-prefect would thus have “learned that the USEPPM could benefit from the Marianne fund during a phone call from Mohamed Sifaoui: he told me he had just come out of a meeting with the minister”in March 2021, even before the official launch of the fund.
In mid-April, Mohamed Sifaoui had assured on Twitter that he had been encouraged to apply “by the members of Madame Schiappa’s cabinet and by herself”. “Encouraging someone to submit a file does not mean that we will support him, it is a general formula which means that the file will be studied, we send the study of the file to the administration”replied Marlène Schiappa on Wednesday morning.
She gave “a negative opinion on the SOS Racisme project”, but did not “remove” a subsidy
Marlène Schiappa was accused of having arbitrated against a grant of 100,000 euros to SOS Racisme as part of the Marianne fund. “I gave a negative opinion on the SOS Racisme project”, she said on Wednesday. But she defended herself from having “deleted” a subsidy allocated to the association, because this endowment was not guaranteed before the launch of the fund.
Why did it exclude SOS Racisme from the beneficiaries of these credits? “The SOS Racisme project proposed a two-step action, on social networks and on physical or sports activities in certain neighborhoods, with an action already carried out” elsewhere, argued the former minister delegate. Opposite, the senators retorted that his choice was in contradiction with the selection committee of the Marianne fund, which had selected SOS Racisme. “You did not have to give an opinion on the associations already selected”, said Claude Raynal. The chairman of the commission of inquiry denounced, in conclusion, a “fiasco” about this Marianne fund. “The method can be questioned, improved and clarified”admitted the Secretary of State, politically weakened.