The Court of Auditors criticizes the government for the “indigent” monitoring of its investment plan in Marseille

At the end of 2023, barely more than 1% of the credits intended for the “Marseille en grand” plan, intended to make up for the historic delays of France’s second city, had been paid.

She did not hold back her criticism. The Court of Auditors denounced monitoring “indigent” of the “Marseille en grand” plan, three years after its launch with great fanfare by Emmanuel Macron, in a report published Monday October 21. As a result, this plan is progressing very slowly: at the end of 2023, only 1.31% of the total amount announced – more than 5 billion euros – had been disbursed by the State, according to the report.

Renovate unsanitary schools, develop public transport in an area which has only two metro lines for more than 870,000 inhabitants, reduce the geographical and social divide between the northern and southern districts, strengthen the police force… This plan, intended to make up for the historical delays of the second largest city in France, some districts of which are the poorest in Europe, was intended to “exceptional” by its amount and content.

However, considers the Court, “the reality of the exceptional and global character of the ‘Marseille en grand’ plan deserves to be qualified”. Thus, the new co-financing actually amounts to only 28% – or 1.55 billion euros – of the total amount announced. Moreover, “conceived in a hasty manner” et “without prior consultation with the stakeholders”the plan presents “a lack of overall coherence”judges the instance.

The report also points out the absence of “overall calendar” et “the insufficient nature of governance and management resources” between the different actors that are the State, the city of Marseille and the metropolis. “The resources that the State has devoted to monitoring the plan are not up to the challenges and can be described as inadequate”she insists.

The Court therefore recommends defining “a contractual framework” accompanied by a timetable and an evaluation system, and “formalize governance arrangements” by associating “the different actors within the same body”.

In their responses to the Court, State, town hall and metropolis passed the buck, the Prime Minister’s services highlighting a “lack of consensus between local actors” and incapacity “local authorities to adhere to the ambition of the plan”.