Tribune. “To have a vision for France, you have to have an ambition for the capital and for Greater Paris” (Nicolas Sarkozy, 2007). “We will make Greater Paris according to the wishes of elected officials” (François Hollande, 2012). “From this fall, I will be offering the basics of Greater Paris, which today is in the middle of the ford due to a structure that is too complex” (Emmanuel Macron, 2017)…
Despite these fine declarations, presidents and governments pass, laws follow one another, institutions come and go, in a permanent mess, reports pile up without ever the substantive debates concerning the future of the Paris metropolitan region. be addressed.
For the past fifteen years, it has been clear that Greater Paris has been reduced to the rank of a simple formula, both totem and taboo, desired and hated, about which citizens do not know much, beyond the cranes that grow and prices that soar. The questions “Which Greater Paris are we talking about?” “And” What Grand Paris do we want? Have never been seriously asked. The confusion is such that citizens no longer know who decides and who does what between municipalities, territories, departments, region and state.
It’s urgent
Regional and departmental elections will be held in June, one year before the presidential election. They must be the occasion to put on the table lively questions which can no longer be evaded.
It’s urgent !
There is an urgent need to vigorously fight against social and territorial inequalities: if the Paris metropolitan region is the richest in France, it is also the most unequal and disparities of all kinds are starting again.
There is an urgent need to respond to the housing crisis, both quantitative and qualitative, which excludes more and more households from access to decent housing.
There is an urgent need to complete the Grand Paris Express with a pluralistic and carbon-free mobility offer and to correct its deleterious effects, in particular real estate speculation around new stations.
There is an urgent need to accelerate the transition of our metropolis towards a sustainable urban model centered on human beings in the perspective of global climate change.
Presidential ulterior motives
Finally, there is an urgent need to debate democratically, because the questions we are raising cannot be reduced to debates by experts. They concern all citizens and require enlightened choices on institutional issues and priority public policies.
You have 35.49% of this article to read. The rest is for subscribers only.