[0:00] While we are recording, the state will

[0:02] have generated 180 million euros in

[0:04] debt. That's 300,000 € per minute.

[0:06] That's 5,000 € per second. It’s

[0:08] cooked. The current presence, it’s

[0:09] dead. There will be losers when I

[0:11] implement my policy. It’s going to be

[0:13] the whole caste of those who cling to

[0:14] their privileges.

[0:15] » Do you believe in your election?

[0:16] » Today, I don't appear as someone who

[0:17] can win. I am aware of all that. He

[0:19] » We have the envelope left.

[0:20] » My great temptation is to tell you no,

[0:21] out of a spirit of provocation.

[0:23] » Spring 2026, the French will elect a

[0:25] president. Between now and then, you'll

[0:28] see it everywhere in the media,

[0:29] everyone talking about polls, alliances

[0:31] , and everyone picking out a soundbite

[0:32] to make a headline. That's not what

[0:34] we're going to do here. We decided to

[0:36] do the opposite, take 60 minutes with

[0:38] the candidate so they can lay out their

[0:40] vision for France. Not the one for

[0:42] tomorrow, not the one right after their

[0:44] election, no, the one they have for the

[0:46] tens, or even twenties, of years to

[0:48] come. So, to structure this interview

[0:49] as best as possible and make it as

[0:51] interesting as possible for you, we

[0:52] decided to build it in stages. And in

[0:53] the interview, there are four. Green,

[0:55] blue, red, and black. Yeah, a bit like

[0:58] ski slopes. The idea is that as the

[1:00] video progresses, the questions become

[1:02] increasingly difficult to answer and I,

[1:03] facing them, challenge them a bit more.

[1:06] And at the end of the interview, we

[1:07] keep the concept of our "confidential

[1:09] interview" that you can also find every

[1:10] Thursday on our channel. An envelope

[1:12] next to them that is present throughout

[1:14] the show and if they want to at the end

[1:16] , they can open it. But be careful, if

[1:17] they decide to open the envelope, they

[1:19] are required to answer the question.

[1:21] The first to sit across from me is

[1:22] David Lisnard, who is the mayor of

[1:24] Cannes, president of the Association of

[1:26] Mayors of France, and a candidate in

[1:27] the presidential election representing

[1:29] his party, New Energy. So let's get

[1:31] started, we have 1 hour with David

[1:34] Lisnard.

[1:39] » Friends, before starting the video, we

[1:41] wanted to give you a quick word. Thank

[1:42] you for being more and more numerous to

[1:44] follow us here. If you like our work,

[1:45] consider subscribing. It takes you 10

[1:47] seconds, but for us, it changes

[1:48] everything. Enjoy the video.

[1:50] » David Lisnard, hello.

[1:51] » Hello.

[1:52] » Thank you for accepting our invitation.

[1:55] » Thank you to you.

[1:56] » Today, we are going to have about an

[1:58] hour. We are going to exchange and

[2:00] discuss your vision for France in the

[2:01] context of the 2027 presidential

[2:03] election, since you are a candidate for

[2:05] the 2027 presidential race. I am

[2:07] warning you right now that during this

[2:09] show, the difficulty level of the

[2:10] questions will increase as the program

[2:12] goes on. We will move a bit like skiing

[2:14] , from the green zone to the red zone,

[2:16] then the black zone. I will try to

[2:18] increase the level of my answers.

[2:20] » I hope they will always be interesting,

[2:21] even from the beginning. And before we

[2:23] begin, there is also an envelope placed

[2:25] right next to you. So on this envelope,

[2:27] it says "confidential." It is a

[2:28] question, this time we are even above

[2:30] the black run. We are

[2:31] » If it is confidential, you shouldn't

[2:33] » Well, if you want to open it at the end

[2:35] , you ask the question, you open it.

[2:37] You will have to answer this question

[2:38] if you open it. If you decide not to

[2:40] open it.

[2:40] » OK,

[2:41] » You don't answer it in any case. What

[2:43] is the ideal France of 2050 for you? Uh

[2:47] , it is a France where my children and

[2:49] hopefully grandchildren can go where

[2:52] they want, how they want, dressed as

[2:55] they want, in safety, where their

[2:57] descendants themselves can look forward

[3:00] to prosperity. It is a France that

[3:03] creates wealth. It is a France that

[3:07] realizes its assets are essential in

[3:10] the 21st century, and notably the

[3:13] creativity of the French people, which,

[3:16] once liberated, makes us an

[3:18] entrepreneurial Eldorado. We see it

[3:22] sometimes, almost absurdly, through all

[3:24] the French people who go abroad, of

[3:26] course from top universities, but also

[3:28] many autodidacts who are often super

[3:30] business leaders who succeed, who are a

[3:32] hit, who invent things. So, for France

[3:35] to be a country that shines through its

[3:37] creativity, a country that has managed

[3:39] to restore its public accounts, that no

[3:41] longer depends on others, a country

[3:43] that, among its assets, is aware of the

[3:45] strength of its geography, of the rock,

[3:47] of the geology. It always strikes me. I

[3:50] was there not long ago, in August, for

[3:53] a few days in the mountains. You see

[3:55] the power of Mont Blanc. There you go,

[3:58] I told you about all that, but all the

[3:59] vibration that one encounters

[4:01] everywhere in France. Uh, when I go to

[4:04] Corsica, it's the same, the rock, it's

[4:07] a magnetic country, right? It is, there

[4:11] you go, a country that has understood

[4:13] that in the century of quantum, since

[4:15] in 2050 we will have finally stabilized

[4:17] quantum technology. Uh, the century of

[4:20] robotics, we absolutely must talk about

[4:22] that. The century of AI, uh, the brain

[4:25] must be permanently augmented itself

[4:28] and not weakened by technology. Let the

[4:32] body and the mind remain the two

[4:34] engines of a fulfilled life, of

[4:36] individual elevation. It is a France

[4:40] that embraces its history, a France

[4:42] that proudly upholds the values that

[4:45] built it: from Aristotelian logic,

[4:47] Greek philosophy, to Roman law, to the

[4:50] immense Judeo-Christian culture that

[4:53] shaped everything, our way of life and

[4:55] our way of rising in ethics and

[4:58] morality, even to the point of

[5:00] abolishing slavery, right. Slavery, it

[5:07] was a global, planetary reality, but

[5:09] ultimately it is here, here in Europe,

[5:11] that the perception of human dignity

[5:13] led to the abolition of slavery.

[5:16] » Which was reinstated later, then

[5:17] re-abolished, or not, but that doesn't

[5:18] change the fact that these debates

[5:20] existed, there you go. And that comes

[5:22] from Judeo-Christian culture, it comes

[5:23] from medieval scholasticism, it comes

[5:25] from the spirit of the Enlightenment;

[5:26] so all these layers that have

[5:28] accumulated. A France that will master

[5:31] breakthrough technologies, that will

[5:34] master the most advanced technologies,

[5:36] you know. A France that will produce

[5:39] its own robots. We will have roughly 50

[5:41] million robots in France by 2050. 20

[5:44] million in industry and services. We

[5:46] will have 20 million in our homes. We

[5:49] will have 10 million to help people

[5:51] with reduced mobility. Well, I hope we

[5:53] will produce them, that companies like

[5:55] VERCraft and others will have become

[5:57] hyper-capitalized global leaders. That

[5:59] every individual will be the owner of

[6:00] their own life

[6:01] » Thanks to quality education, thanks to

[6:03] a funded pension system. that we will

[6:05] have put in place starting in 2027

[6:07] after my election. And precisely to

[6:11] talk about that, because we are talking

[6:13] about robots, today France is still in

[6:14] last place or very far behind in

[6:16] producing robots, even if French people

[6:18] probably use a negative view, then,

[6:24] that you have of France today.

[6:27] » That is a good, that is a good point to

[6:28] bounce off of. Yes. I have...well, if I

[6:31] am here before you, and it is a

[6:32] pleasure to be here, it is because it

[6:34] seemed to me that we must be very

[6:36] clear-eyed about our country's decline,

[6:38] the most serious of which is the

[6:40] educational decline.

[6:41] » Some say that France is becoming a

[6:42] third-world country, by the way.

[6:43] » Yes, yes, of course it is becoming a

[6:44] third-world country. You are too young,

[6:46] but I knew a time when the...well, when

[6:49] you could take a plane without having a

[6:51] delayed flight 9 times out of 10. Right

[6:54] , it's...Yes, there is a form of

[6:57] third-worldization, obviously, but at

[6:59] the same time, along with a fantastic

[7:02] potential...I often say that I fight

[7:04] for the real country, to quote Victor

[7:07] Hugo. The real country is very creative

[7:12] ; common sense is just asking to take

[7:15] power once again. Meaning,

[7:18] understanding that work must pay more

[7:20] than idleness, that investment must be

[7:23] rewarded, that risk-taking must be

[7:25] rewarded, and that we cannot live in a

[7:27] society that only aims to protect

[7:30] itself through egalitarianism,

[7:32] standardization, and the most sordid

[7:34] uniformity. The whole challenge of the

[7:38] coming months and years will be to make

[7:40] every individual strong, to recreate

[7:42] national concord, to regain security,

[7:45] to regain prosperity, and to regain an

[7:47] educational and scientific ambition.

[7:50] That is the foundation of all of this.

[7:51] I am developing a project on this, and

[7:54] yes, by symmetry, it points to the fact

[7:56] that we were among the top 10 countries

[7:59] producing the most wealth per capita

[8:01] just 30 years ago. We have dropped to

[8:04] 27th place. We were a country envied

[8:06] for the quality of its public education

[8:08] . Today, we are the dunces of Europe.

[8:11] We are last in the PISA rankings in

[8:12] Europe, and in the TIMSS rankings for

[8:14] mathematics as well. We must put

[8:16] mathematics, grammar, French, and

[8:18] critical thinking back at the heart of

[8:20] the national project. Uh.

[8:22] » And what happened? Why did we arrive at

[8:24] » First, there are cyclical effects, as

[8:25] always in life. Moreover, if you like,

[8:28] we will talk about the great cycles

[8:30] that we will have to master. The long

[8:33] cycle of the end of the Renaissance,

[8:35] the cycle of the end of the welfare

[8:37] state, and the short cycle of the end

[8:39] of Macronism, to return to more

[8:40] political matters. And what happened is

[8:44] that there was a tremendous renewal of

[8:46] elites after the Second World War. And

[8:50] periods of great crisis, like wars,

[8:52] mean that personalities who have a bit

[8:55] of edge, who have character...You have

[8:57] to reread General de Gaulle’s words

[9:00] in his books from the 30s! The Edge of

[9:03] the Sword, in particular, Towards the

[9:04] Professional Army as well, but The Edge

[9:06] of the Sword, when he defines the man

[9:07] of character, the person of character.

[9:10] So we had elites who both had a

[9:12] classical rigor, who had been trained

[9:15] in the most classical way but who had

[9:18] faced the harsh edges of life and who

[9:20] had become leaders in situations that

[9:23] reveal characters who know how to face

[9:26] turbulence. And so we arrived, and

[9:29] there were the "Glorious Thirty" years

[9:31] with demographic growth upon which our

[9:33] entire prosperity relied. We had more

[9:36] children, we invested, we paid early,

[9:38] and then for about thirty years, there

[9:40] was a desire to prolong this system

[9:43] even though productivity isn't there,

[9:45] we don't control immigration, and we

[9:47] have settlement migration instead of

[9:50] the labor migration we had before, and

[9:52] it is massive now, whereas before it

[9:54] was controlled. Uh, that we aren't

[9:56] having kids anymore. That the entire

[9:59] pension system is collapsing and that

[10:01] the elite, through certain top schools,

[10:03] has become uniform and reproduced

[10:05] itself. And these are the three ages of

[10:09] aristocracy from, I believe,

[10:11] Chateaubriand, but there you go, we've

[10:13] arrived at the age of privileges. So

[10:17] now we need a circulation of elites, we

[10:19] need a renewal of elites, and otherwise

[10:21] our country will collapse. As it is,

[10:24] it's collapsing while amplifying its

[10:26] own decline. Twenty or twenty-five

[10:28] years ago, we were at the same standard

[10:29] of living as the average American.

[10:30] Today, we are 40%less wealthy than

[10:32] Americans. It's all happening very fast

[10:34] , what is going on today. Either

[10:36] through violence, with engineers of

[10:38] violence, engineers of chaos—well, I

[10:40] don't know if they're engineers, by the

[10:41] way, but in any case, they produce

[10:43] chaos, especially the far-left, and the

[10:45] LFI, and Jean-Luc Mélenchon's whole

[10:47] clique. You are currently the mayor of

[10:50] Cannes, and have been for a long time.

[10:52] Uh, what has being mayor of Cannes

[10:55] taught you regarding what we have at

[10:57] the city scale compared to France?

[11:00] » Well, first of all, I applied

[11:01] principles there that I have always

[11:03] applied in everything I've been

[11:04] entrusted with, in both the private and

[11:05] public sectors. I managed a large

[11:07] drinking water authority, I believe in

[11:09] the public sector, and when I left, the

[11:12] price of water was 30%cheaper than the

[11:14] national average. We had paid off its

[11:15] debt and it was functioning well. Uh,

[11:18] there you go, I have businesses and so

[11:20] on. It means that the principles of

[11:22] good management apply everywhere,

[11:24] including in the public sector. When

[11:27] you manage to motivate your teams, when

[11:30] you manage to define objectives, to

[11:32] think in terms of—as we used to say

[11:34] in previous generations, but it works

[11:37] very well—zero-based budgeting, which

[11:39] means building budget surpluses and

[11:41] saying that it’s unavoidable, that it

[11:44] can’t last otherwise, that you only

[11:46] borrow for investment, to practice

[11:48] participative management, to remove the

[11:52] bad ones—there are 22%fewer employees

[11:55] at city hall than 12 years ago—but to

[11:57] reward the vast majority of people who

[11:59] work well, to lead, to direct, to

[12:01] encourage the civil servants, the staff

[12:04] , to be pragmatic, by applying this, it

[12:06] works. So we have lowered the debt by

[12:09] —we are going to be at 84 million

[12:10] euros in debt reduction without

[12:11] off-balance sheet accounting in a city

[12:13] that is very complicated, you know. I

[12:15] —because I am forced every time to

[12:16] deconstruct the cliché linked to the

[12:18] festival, if you like. Cannes is a city

[12:20] that, historically, is a cosmopolitan

[12:23] city. It is a city of strong

[12:24] immigration, poor immigration. It is a

[12:26] city that has had a very high poverty

[12:27] rate since the 19th century, and we

[12:29] welcome poverty. There you go, 21%or

[12:31] even 22%poverty, so very strong social

[12:33] contracts.

[12:35] » And that one must always remember the

[12:38] goal, which is that of the common good,

[12:41] so the principles of rigorous

[12:43] management, of listening to everyone

[12:46] and of not trivializing the testimony,

[12:49] the words of each individual we meet,

[12:52] but not falling into clientelism. There

[12:56] must be proximity, but not familiarity.

[12:58] It is, and that the exercise of

[13:01] authority, you know—

[13:03] » With your collaborators, you mean?

[13:04] » With everyone, with the residents as

[13:05] well. I am mandated by the residents.

[13:07] Uh, it’s what I understand at the

[13:09] national level. I think many people

[13:11] forget that. We are one resident among

[13:12] other residents, but mandated. So when

[13:14] you are mandated, you are accountable;

[13:16] when you are an agent, you answer to

[13:17] the principal. So always being

[13:19] accountable, explaining, trying to lead

[13:22] positively, obviously. We all do

[13:24] communication, we try to promote what

[13:26] we do well, to explain when things go

[13:28] wrong, not to hide things, not to mask

[13:30] security problems, drug dealing, or

[13:32] incivility that drive me crazy.

[13:34] Problems one might encounter with

[13:35] construction work, there are

[13:36] difficulties. Well, it's a magnificent

[13:39] experience because the commune,

[13:42] community, it's all the same etymology,

[13:45] it's truly the geographical space that

[13:48] carries meaning, history, and and

[13:50] future. That's where you realize it

[13:52] physically. Uh, man is a social animal,

[13:55] and we will see it more and more with

[13:57] the rise of of of the of of the digital

[14:00] world, which is already exponential.

[14:02] Anyway, and uh, and so it's this, it's

[14:06] a human community. Uh, a mayor is a

[14:09] practitioner, uh, you must have

[14:11] principles, convictions, values, but

[14:13] the thing that counts is the reality.

[14:16] It is always the reality that must

[14:18] prevail. So, very concretely, there are

[14:20] services that I have outsourced,

[14:21] privatized. There are other services

[14:23] that I have brought back in-house, even

[14:24] though it was counterintuitive for me,

[14:26] because it was rational. For example,

[14:27] regarding green spaces, I outsourced

[14:29] them; regarding urban cleanliness,

[14:31] which is a service that I find has

[14:33] progressed a lot, enormously, where I

[14:35] think we are really, well, we're doing

[14:37] pretty well thanks to good teams. The

[14:40] teams explained that there had been, in

[14:42] the past, the privatization of certain

[14:43] cleaning services for stickers,

[14:45] something like that, which actually

[14:47] cost a lot because there was no

[14:48] competition in the private sector and

[14:50] that our agents could do it, provided

[14:52] they were paid better, and in the end,

[14:54] it would cost us less, and it worked.

[14:56] There are other things, however, where

[14:58] in the private sector there was real

[15:00] competition, so there was better

[15:01] productivity, so we outsourced; it's

[15:03] about being pragmatic.

[15:05] » Yes. What you're advocating is

[15:06] pragmatism, if I if I...

[15:07] » Yes. But while keeping objectives in

[15:09] mind, because pragmatism alone goes in

[15:11] circles, and you also have to give it

[15:12] sense, give it meaning.

[15:14] » Yeah. And to what extent does your

[15:17] liberal logic, since you claim to be a

[15:18] liberal, apply to your political

[15:20] persona? Is the idea to make budget

[15:24] cuts? You advocate for pragmatism; to

[15:27] what extent does pragmatism also align

[15:28] with liberalism? How...

[15:30] » Your question is very peculiar because

[15:32] it reveals, forgive me, but an

[15:34] ideological bias. Uh, so we must, we

[15:36] must really put all that aside. You

[15:39] tell me liberal, budget cuts.

[15:41] » I, I don't really see the connection,

[15:42] if you will. What is a liberal? Who is

[15:45] that? It consists of thinking that

[15:47] freedom is the characteristic of the

[15:52] human being, of humanity, that it is a

[15:53] permanent struggle and that it is both

[15:55] the best tool for efficiency (so it has

[15:57] a utilitarian value; we must certainly

[15:59] not rely solely on utilitarianism), but

[16:01] it also has a moral value, meaning that

[16:03] freedom is the condition of dignity. So

[16:05] , without resorting to low-level

[16:07] philosophy, we only know we are free

[16:09] when we know we assume responsibility

[16:11] for our actions, because that is the

[16:12] condition of freedom. And so it is what

[16:15] makes for human dignity, what makes us

[16:17] have choices, makes a person full in

[16:19] their dignity because we have freedom

[16:21] of choice, and to be free, one must

[16:23] have ownership of one's life, ownership

[16:25] of one's actions. Liberalism is a

[16:28] vision of man, a vision of humanity;

[16:31] it's not about making budget cuts.

[16:33] Sometimes you might have to make budget

[16:36] cuts. It's a method to free people

[16:38] through

[16:38] » Starting with a philosophical principle

[16:39] . Shall I tell you why? It's to free

[16:41] individuals from the burden of taxation

[16:42] . Because to talk about budget

[16:44] expenditures is to talk about revenue,

[16:46] which means less individual freedom in

[16:48] controlling one's income and capital.

[16:49] » So, more taxes mean less freedom.

[16:52] » Of course. Well, yes, if you have €

[16:54] 100 and you have the freedom to control

[16:56] your € 100, and I say to you, "Well,

[16:58] here, I'm taking 50," well, you are no

[17:00] longer free to do what you want with

[17:01] the € 50 I took from you. So, you

[17:04] lose € 50 of freedom of action, you

[17:07] see. It's as simple as that. And it's a

[17:09] principle that is the matrix of

[17:12] prosperity. When you are the owner of

[17:15] the gains from the fruits of your

[17:17] efforts, you are motivated. Exactly.

[17:21] And every country—so it's a question

[17:22] of balance, because we also need taxes,

[17:24] we need the common good, we need public

[17:26] services operating on subsidiarity,

[17:27] doing what the market cannot do or what

[17:29] the market should not do. Not

[17:31] everything is for sale. Precisely, the

[17:33] human body is not for sale. There we

[17:34] are, well within the principles we call

[17:36] natural rights. It is therefore the

[17:38] preservation of life

[17:39] » The mastery of the human body is

[17:41] essential. And the principle is very

[17:43] simple; it is at the base of liberal

[17:45] societies and the progress of humanity.

[17:47] Meaning that freedom never has to be

[17:48] justified; it is the restriction of

[17:50] freedom that must be justified. And so,

[17:53] freedom must be restricted so that the

[17:54] freedom of some does not infringe upon

[17:56] the freedom of others. The finest text

[17:58] from that perspective is the

[17:59] Declaration of the Rights of Man and of

[18:00] the Citizen of 1789. And in very

[18:02] concrete terms, what does that mean? It

[18:04] means that I cannot, well, I am not

[18:06] free to steal the property of others. I

[18:09] am not free to damage public space

[18:11] because I am encroaching on the freedom

[18:13] of other citizens who will pay taxes to

[18:15] restore the integrity of public space,

[18:17] repair urban property, and so on. It is

[18:20] always a balance. It is never as

[18:21] obvious as that. I must absolutely

[18:23] preserve the freedom to demonstrate and

[18:25] to express oneself. But that freedom is

[18:27] not a freedom to destroy. So, when a

[18:30] prefect issues an order, a prefectural

[18:32] decree to ban a demonstration, it is

[18:34] often abusive, and there has been a

[18:36] shift toward restricting liberties in

[18:38] France in recent years. On the other

[18:40] hand, if the demonstration

[18:41] systematically smashes all the shops,

[18:43] it is obvious that it must be banned

[18:44] because it is an attack on the property

[18:46] of others, and thus on the freedom of

[18:48] others. It is an extraordinary way of

[18:49] thinking, actually. In fact, it is just

[18:51] common sense. For me, if you will, I do

[18:52] not care about ideology. I, many people

[18:54] claim common sense on both the left and

[18:56] the right.

[18:57] » Yes, of course. But, listen, in any

[18:59] case, nonsense exists, that is for sure

[19:01] , in every sense of the word. If you

[19:03] allow me, liberal, then.

[19:05] » It is, but there too you fall into "

[19:06] isms," but that is because we are going

[19:07] to define you, we are going to fall

[19:09] into intellectual stuff. Common sense

[19:11] is letting individuals flourish,

[19:13] prosper, and understanding that the

[19:16] common good needs individuals who can

[19:18] express themselves, that there is

[19:20] nothing, that 1,000 controls cost

[19:22] society much more than one or two

[19:24] people who abuse the system, and so on.

[19:28] That is to say, at a given moment,

[19:30] there is a notion of spontaneous order

[19:33] which is the matrix of progress, of

[19:35] prosperity, of solving material

[19:37] problems, and that public authority

[19:39] must intervene; it has a major role,

[19:41] violence, a monopoly on legitimate

[19:43] violence, as Max Weber said, to ensure

[19:45] order in society, order at the service

[19:48] of individual liberties. And it is all

[19:51] about that balance. And today, I am

[19:53] still labeled as a liberal. Well, I

[19:54] thought it was a compliment. At first,

[19:55] I understood that it was a bit

[19:57] pejorative in France, but that’s

[19:58] simply because the country has become

[19:59] super socialist, you know. H

[20:02] » You see, in other countries, I wouldn't

[20:03] even be called a liberal economically

[20:05] speaking, I mean, you know. And when

[20:08] you have a public apparatus that today

[20:11] captures 57%, soon 58%, of all wealth

[20:13] produced, it has never happened in

[20:16] history. It’s the absolute record,

[20:19] France is. Public spending is 58%of

[20:22] wealth. There is obviously a prosperity

[20:25] problem, but there is a freedom problem

[20:27] . That’s obvious. And so, we

[20:29] absolutely must carry out this

[20:31] revolution of freedom. So, to reach the

[20:33] ideal France you mentioned at the

[20:36] beginning for 2050, if you take power

[20:39] in 2027 and perhaps subsequent terms,

[20:42] how does that happen concretely? If we

[20:45] decide to lower taxes as you mentioned,

[20:48] how do we manage public services, how

[20:50] is all that organized? Knowing that

[20:54] today we already feel that public

[20:56] services are struggling with France’s

[20:58] current tax levels. How do we manage?

[21:00] Second deconstruction of the question.

[21:03] » Very well.

[21:03] » It’s because there is too much public

[21:05] spending and too many taxes that there

[21:07] is a problem with public services. Now,

[21:08] that’s counterintuitive. So I’m

[21:10] curious, explain.

[21:12] » But, and this has actually been

[21:13] theorized in economics, by the way. Uh,

[21:16] but it’s very simple; you see, I’m

[21:19] going to turn it around. I’ll take

[21:22] one of the most highly administered

[21:23] countries where they have very good

[21:25] public services in Europe; I won’t

[21:26] compare it to Asia, Latin America, etc.

[21:28] , or the past. Today, you take the

[21:31] Netherlands; the Netherlands has a per

[21:33] capita income higher than ours and

[21:35] better social coverage than ours. In

[21:38] the Netherlands, you get very, very

[21:39] good care, you have emergency services,

[21:41] and there is an effective justice

[21:42] system. They have managed to contain

[21:45] delinquency, and they even have

[21:47] under-occupied prisons. Prevention, a

[21:50] lot of prevention I imagine, but

[21:52] prevention and above all, no, there is

[21:53] especially a very strong authority and

[21:55] very fast, very quick. We move very

[21:56] fast.

[21:56] » OK.

[21:57] » And do you know the amount of public

[21:59] spending in the Netherlands relative to

[22:01] wealth? For us in France, I say 57%of

[22:03] GDP, of the wealth produced. In the

[22:05] Netherlands, it’s 45%. Do you realize

[22:08] that? There is a 12-point gap. That

[22:10] means 12 points of French GDP—we'll

[22:13] verify, but it must be 350 billion

[22:15] euros. That means that in the

[22:18] Netherlands, they have better public

[22:19] services while spending, all things

[22:21] being equal, 350 billion euros less.

[22:23] Why? Because in France, there is a

[22:26] diversion of taxpayer money toward

[22:28] hyper-bureaucracy. H

[22:30] » The OECD—not me, not some

[22:32] ultra-liberal think tank—estimates

[22:33] that French over-bureaucratization

[22:35] compared to European bureaucracy (and

[22:37] Europe is already the most

[22:38] bureaucratized continent in the world)

[22:40] ...That over-bureaucracy accounts for

[22:42] at least three points of wealth. That

[22:45] is to say, over 80 billion, almost 90

[22:47] billion euros in excess costs. So the

[22:50] goal, the goal is to have more nurses

[22:53] taking care of us in hospitals, to have

[22:56] more police on the streets. I mean,

[22:59] after 1 AM in police-patrolled zones,

[23:01] you have almost no national police left

[23:03] in France—in the country that holds

[23:05] the world record for taxes, social

[23:07] charges, and public spending—to have

[23:09] more court clerks, more prison spaces,

[23:11] more effective and better-paid teachers

[23:13] , and to rediscover a scientific

[23:14] ambition, including in public science.

[23:17] And for that, there must be less

[23:19] bureaucracy. To have less bureaucracy,

[23:21] we need fewer absurd, contradictory

[23:24] rules. So, we have to start all over

[23:25] again. Debureaucratize, deregulate,

[23:28] decentralize. Fewer bureaucrats paid

[23:30] with our taxes, more police, more

[23:33] teachers. You know, I remember France

[23:36] —it's the privilege of age—before

[23:37] the ARS,

[23:39] » Before the regional health agencies,

[23:41] » Before the regional environmental

[23:43] directorate, before the MRAE, well,

[23:45] before all these...

[23:47] » 11 entities that today must give us

[23:49] authorization to build a factory or

[23:51] create a school, purely from an

[23:52] environmental standpoint, that

[23:54] contradict each other, that contradict

[23:56] those in charge of health, which

[23:57] themselves contradict those in charge

[23:59] of urban planning law. There is an

[24:02] inflation of regulations, there is

[24:03] textual harassment. So the major

[24:07] challenge is to reorganize governance,

[24:09] to reorganize public authorities.

[24:13] » Is it possible to do that today?

[24:15] » We have the impression that we are

[24:16] stuck. I say, as a young person too,

[24:18] what is impossible is to continue like

[24:20] today. We have a system that creates

[24:22] poverty. We have a system that locks

[24:25] people into poverty traps. 60%of French

[24:28] employees have a salary below 1.6 times

[24:30] the minimum wage. Why? Because we

[24:33] created surcharges on labor, and since

[24:35] that didn't work, we offered exemptions

[24:37] below 1.6 times the minimum wage. So,

[24:39] we’re locking people in. I want to be

[24:41] the movement for those who want to get

[24:43] ahead, for social mobility. France has

[24:45] been in a calamitous situation several

[24:47] times in its history, just like today.

[24:49] I’m thinking in particular of '58,

[24:50] the end of the Fourth Republic, the

[24:52] decolonization—it was colossal.

[24:54] General de Gaulle—now, I’m not de

[24:56] Gaulle, but General de Gaulle in '58,

[24:58] in nine months, went from a 6%public

[25:00] deficit to a surplus. We are at nearly

[25:02] 6%today in France. He restarted the

[25:04] machine and overhauled the institutions

[25:06] . Other countries have done it:

[25:09] Schröder's Germany, Milei's Argentina,

[25:12] Thatcher's England—even the social

[25:14] democrats, I'm talking about people on

[25:16] the left in Sweden, Denmark, they’ve

[25:18] succeeded, as have Canada and New

[25:20] Zealand. We have remained stuck in

[25:23] patterns that are overly statist,

[25:25] overly Keynesian, and overly socialist.

[25:27] All of that pretty much goes together.

[25:28] So, it is time to move on to something

[25:30] else. That is what I am proposing. This

[25:33] is the complete opposite of extremism.

[25:35] It is extremely rational and reasonable

[25:37] , but it is radical. Meaning we are

[25:38] going to the root of things. And it’s

[25:41] the only way to regain effective, local

[25:43] public services. It’s the only way to

[25:45] regain economic oxygen. It’s the only

[25:48] way to recreate social mobility. Look,

[25:50] I'll give you some things we are going

[25:53] to do. We are going to remove the

[25:55] precautionary principle from the

[25:56] Constitution, and we will truly

[25:57] implement a powerful environmental and

[25:59] ecological policy.

[25:59] » Could you briefly explain the

[26:00] precautionary principle in the

[26:01] Constitution?

[26:02] » Well, it was introduced by the Charter

[26:04] for the Environment, and today it has

[26:06] created case law that prevents us, for

[26:08] example, from scientific research on

[26:10] corn and GMOs, and so on, which...all

[26:12] business leaders will tell you, it

[26:14] blocks projects and doesn’t even help

[26:16] the environment. The environment is

[26:18] fundamental; it is essential. So, if

[26:21] you like, I will detail what my

[26:22] ecological policy will be, and we are

[26:24] going to replace it with a principle of

[26:27] responsibility. We must not pollute, we

[26:29] must not endanger the lives of

[26:31] employees, we must not—you see,

[26:33] simple, effective general principles of

[26:35] law that truly protect. And then,

[26:37] everyone is free to allocate their own

[26:39] resources. It’s essential. We're

[26:43] going to set up a system, a single

[26:45] social allowance, which will ensure

[26:47] there's at least a € 500 income gap

[26:50] between those who work and those who

[26:53] don't, because we need to incentivize

[26:55] work again. Thanks to the reduction of

[27:00] unnecessary spending...Over the last 25

[27:02] years, the state has created 1,153

[27:04] senatorial reports, agencies, entities,

[27:06] and directorates that cost us this year

[27:08] , and that contradict each other,

[27:10] including the High Commission for this,

[27:12] the High Authority for that, the

[27:14] regional directorates, all these state

[27:16] services that cost...we are going to

[27:18] exceed 100 billion euros in operating

[27:21] costs. 100 billion euros. So we must

[27:23] reduce and eliminate all these things

[27:25] that feed on each other just to find

[27:27] spots for buddies. It has been a

[27:30] Republic of cronies and rogues, as they

[27:32] say, with 500,000 extra hires, 500,000

[27:34] more public service employees. There

[27:36] are some very good people in there,

[27:37] mind you.

[27:38] » Mind you. And well, we won't replace

[27:40] those who retire. We will reorient and

[27:43] eliminate most of these things. We will

[27:45] need to keep a few agencies that

[27:47] guarantee independence and...

[27:49] » How do you judge which agency is

[27:50] useless? Which agency is useful? Well,

[27:53] it's very simple; it’s like when you

[27:54] arrive in a company, you say, "Show me

[27:56] the utility of what you do." People

[27:58] write memos to each other, and I say, "

[28:00] We don't care about your memos." You go

[28:02] to Bercy. French excellence at Bercy,

[28:06] except that many agents there only

[28:08] write memos to each other that serve no

[28:09] purpose. They serve no purpose. You see

[28:11] , you have to understand that creation

[28:13] requires an act of suppression. That is

[28:15] the whole paradox. It's like cooking,

[28:17] you reduce the sauce, and what about

[28:19] the agents at Bercy watching?

[28:21] » Yes, I embrace them, but they will be

[28:23] happy because they will be

[28:24] participating in the modernization of

[28:26] the state and the performance of France

[28:27] . And those who remain will be better

[28:29] paid than before, for those who are

[28:30] currently underpaid. Ultimately, we

[28:32] will become a modern power again, a

[28:34] modern state that will use

[28:36] digitalization and all the current

[28:38] means of performance. So we will have

[28:41] to launch three major projects

[28:43] simultaneously. A major prosperity law

[28:45] through the liberalization of economic

[28:47] activity. Removing bureaucratic, fiscal

[28:51] , social, and administrative overloads.

[28:55] A major law, or at any rate a major

[28:57] policy for restoring order, means

[28:59] rewriting the juvenile penal code,

[29:01] partnering with countries that have

[29:03] available prison space, like the

[29:05] Netherlands, and launching a program

[29:08] for 20,000 prison places. A policy

[29:11] aimed at breaking free from the grip of

[29:13] European and high-court jurisprudence

[29:15] to control our population. We cannot

[29:18] envision the future of a nation without

[29:19] controlling its population, without

[29:21] deciding who comes in. A drastic

[29:23] reduction in immigration, better

[29:25] integration. Many immigrants actually

[29:26] agree with me. They tell me, "We can't

[29:27] take any more, it's not possible, you

[29:28] have to turn off the tap." What? I am

[29:30] in a city with high immigration, and

[29:31] many immigrants support me. So, no

[29:32] issues there. The third policy is how

[29:35] we finally become a great educational

[29:36] power again. How we set schools free.

[29:39] We must abolish the egalitarianism of

[29:41] the school zoning system. Public

[29:43] funding must follow parental choice, so

[29:47] all kids and all parents can put their

[29:50] child in the school they want. It

[29:53] shouldn't be the administration telling

[29:54] you, "You go to this school or that one

[29:55] ," and we will have competition between

[29:57] institutions. Principals will choose

[29:59] who they admit. We will keep a network

[30:02] of public schools at the level of

[30:04] former districts, centers of excellence

[30:06] with boarding schools and elite

[30:07] teachers to maintain consistent

[30:09] geographical coverage, but for

[30:10] everything else, we will fully liberate

[30:12] the school system, and there are many

[30:14] initiatives being taken simultaneously.

[30:17] There it is. Anyway, aren't you afraid

[30:19] that—it's interesting, but aren't you

[30:21] afraid that this logic will actually

[30:23] create inequalities?

[30:24] » But that is also counterintuitive.

[30:26] Today, we are the country in Europe

[30:28] where people are most trapped by their

[30:30] social conditions. I have a very simple

[30:32] point. I am the first in my family—

[30:34] well, along with my brother—to have

[30:35] earned my high school diploma. You have

[30:37] to understand that. For you, that might

[30:39] seem good.

[30:39] » No, but that's my case too. The current

[30:42] system is the most unfair, all in the

[30:44] name of egalitarianism. It creates

[30:46] inequality of opportunity and breeds

[30:48] inequity and injustice. The current

[30:51] system means that the middle and upper

[30:53] classes, a fortiori, bypass the entire

[30:56] zoning system; all the more or less

[30:58] leftist education ministers we've had

[31:01] who criticize independent schools and

[31:04] so on. I am a product of the secular

[31:05] public school system, you know. I never

[31:06] put my kids in private school. Well,

[31:08] but it was a different era, too. Uh,

[31:10] they all put their kids in private

[31:11] schools. It is absolute hypocrisy. So

[31:14] what we need is to put an end to the

[31:16] leveling down. All these children from

[31:18] modest backgrounds must be able to

[31:20] access the best schools, provided, of

[31:22] course, they work hard and meet the

[31:24] right adults who will raise them.

[31:26] Actually, we call them a "student"[

[31:27] élève], because you have to be raised

[31:28] [élevé] by someone higher than

[31:29] yourself, who is called an adult. I

[31:31] assure you that everywhere what I'm

[31:33] saying has been implemented—in

[31:34] certain Baltic countries, in some

[31:36] schools in Finland, in Finland, in some

[31:38] cantons in Switzerland, and now in

[31:40] Germany—everywhere it has worked.

[31:44] Milton Friedman theorized this, but it

[31:46] works wonderfully well, and we do it

[31:47] because the current system is total

[31:49] hypocrisy in the name of equality; we

[31:51] use school zoning, sectorization, the

[31:52] administration tells you where you have

[31:54] to put your kid in school, for heaven's

[31:56] sake. What an authoritarian act that is

[31:59] . Honestly, well, and in the end, we

[32:02] realize that we are amplifying social

[32:04] inequalities; that the children of

[32:06] teachers know very well where they need

[32:08] to be, that the children of senior

[32:10] executives, of bosses, know very well

[32:12] where they need to be, even going on to

[32:14] study abroad, and it's, it's fantastic.

[32:17] But it is time—that is why the

[32:19] working classes must have access to

[32:20] equal opportunity. It is time for the

[32:22] working poor to be the owners of their

[32:24] own retirement. That's why we're going

[32:25] to...I have been fighting for this for

[32:27] over 10 years. They will have a funded

[32:29] pension system, they will have access

[32:30] to financial markets, and they will be

[32:32] winners. There you go, the poorest, the

[32:34] poorest workers will be less poor. It

[32:36] is time we defend the most modest in

[32:38] this country, not with what has led

[32:41] them to social stagnation, what traps

[32:43] them in poverty traps, in identity

[32:46] traps, but by liberating all of their

[32:48] capacity.

[32:49] » By the way, if you prefer audio over

[32:51] video, know that you can find our shows

[32:53] on all podcast platforms. You spoke

[32:56] about immigration, it's a point I find

[32:58] interesting because it is one of the

[32:59] subjects of the presidential election

[33:01] that will dominate the debate. For you

[33:04] today, is there too much immigration?

[33:06] » Yes. Yes, there is too much immigration

[33:09] quantitatively, since in 2025, last

[33:11] year, I am talking about new residence

[33:13] permits. They are additional residence

[33:15] permits. It represented one and a half

[33:17] times the population of Corsica. There

[33:19] you go, it's 400,000 residence permits.

[33:21] I'm talking about additional residence

[33:24] permits.

[33:25] » Excluding asylum, mind you, because

[33:27] contrary to what a journalist corrected

[33:28] me on—he was wrong—and we aren't

[33:30] talking about illegal immigration. And

[33:33] of those additional residence permits,

[33:35] only 17%are work-related; that means 83

[33:37] %are people who come and don't work,

[33:39] and who don't come for work—these

[33:41] people will probably find a job later

[33:43] and contribute to the economy, they

[33:45] aren't going to stay. No, I'm sorry,

[33:48] but we can tell ourselves stories as

[33:51] much as we want. The reality is that

[33:54] among the temporary residence permits

[33:56] issued for a reason of stay, 17%are

[33:58] linked to an employment contract. 83%

[34:01] are not linked to that. It is a factual

[34:03] reality. Even at 25%, it would still be

[34:05] a problem. Even at 50%, it would be a

[34:07] problem. So the reality is that France

[34:10] must be a country that welcomes

[34:13] oppressed people, people in difficulty.

[34:17] Obviously, France is also about

[34:19] humanism, but you cannot import so much

[34:22] poverty, especially from countries that

[34:24] are in great difficulty and have

[34:26] different customs, without creating

[34:28] enormous unrest. And once again, who

[34:31] gets the short end of the stick in all

[34:32] this? It's the French people,

[34:34] regardless of their origin, including

[34:36] those from less recent migrations, who

[34:38] are in the poorest and most

[34:39] working-class neighborhoods, since we

[34:41] pack people into those neighborhoods

[34:43] because they are poor. So they go to

[34:45] neighborhoods where they can find

[34:46] housing, where it's still possible to

[34:48] find housing, and so we amplify the

[34:49] problems. So it is a question of both

[34:52] social cohesion and a humanitarian and

[34:54] human one. We can no longer welcome

[34:58] people who cannot find work, who cannot

[35:02] find housing, it's just not possible.

[35:07] I've had classes in my working-class

[35:09] neighborhoods where you have entire

[35:11] classrooms where they say they need

[35:13] allophone classes because a sometimes

[35:15] very large majority of children do not

[35:17] master, or master the French language

[35:19] very poorly. It is not socially

[35:21] possible. It is not possible. You are

[35:23] amplifying social divides, you are

[35:25] amplifying territorial divides, you are

[35:27] amplifying every difficulty. So it is

[35:29] both a question of social cohesion, a

[35:32] question of order in every sense of the

[35:34] term, and of public order. And it is

[35:36] also simply a human question. So we

[35:39] must welcome fewer people, but welcome

[35:41] them better.

[35:43] » But at the time, it's been 10 years now

[35:45] that we know how to do it legally,

[35:46] since François Fillon had proposed it.

[35:50] It is that we must, through a

[35:52] referendum, escape the vice of legal

[35:54] precedents and the over-interpretation

[36:00] of the founding texts of the European

[36:02] Court of Human Rights, and so on, which

[36:05] have caused the right to family

[36:07] reunification, the right to immigration

[36:09] —to put it simply—to take

[36:11] precedence over the right to control

[36:13] immigration. So we must do as almost

[36:16] every nation in the world does,

[36:18] including great democracies like Canada

[36:20] and others. Saying, "Here is who we can

[36:23] welcome," and regarding countries of

[36:25] origin—it's not just about having a

[36:27] vision; it's simpler. I mean, France

[36:30] has the Mediterranean, there are people

[36:32] coming from African countries who cross

[36:34] the Mediterranean and end up on the

[36:36] shores of Italy or sometimes even

[36:38] France. How can we, then—the main,

[36:42] the essential migratory flows take

[36:44] place largely by land, so that's the

[36:46] first element, second element. It's,

[36:51] well, I mean, just as we...

[36:53] » Is there a sense of humanism? Should we

[36:55] have humanism? Those are the questions.

[36:57] And afterward, should we also have an

[36:59] international policy regarding African

[37:00] countries?

[37:01] » Well, several things in your question,

[37:02] several things in your question. First,

[37:04] it is always paradoxical to see that

[37:06] often the same people who tell us we

[37:07] can influence the climate—and I do

[37:09] think we must fight against the human

[37:10] part of climate change. So I can talk

[37:13] about it at length if you wish. You

[37:16] think we could manage to modify the

[37:17] climate, but we couldn't manage to

[37:19] control migratory flows? I find that

[37:22] quite paradoxical. The second element

[37:25] is that...There are several ways. There

[37:29] are several—we have to look at

[37:31] several parameters. Humanism is

[37:33] primarily an individual approach. I

[37:36] personally would not let someone die of

[37:38] hunger or sleep outside. We try to

[37:40] ensure that people can sleep and have a

[37:42] roof over their heads in my town, and

[37:43] so on. There is an element of

[37:45] individual charity, but I am talking to

[37:47] you about immigration as a social

[37:48] phenomenon, and that is how we must

[37:49] approach it in politics. By saying "we

[37:52] regulate those who come" and "we must

[37:54] welcome them," you create flows that

[37:56] amplify the problem and the social

[37:58] tragedy. Uh, those who are

[38:00] pro-immigration today bear a very heavy

[38:02] moral responsibility for, uh, the

[38:04] development of all these smuggler

[38:06] networks, uh, for, uh, besides, I saw

[38:08] that in Germany, well, there was a case

[38:11] against so-called humanitarian

[38:12] associations that, in reality, uh, are

[38:15] endorsing smuggler networks. So there

[38:17] isn't a single nation in the world that

[38:19] is a community of destiny, that is a

[38:20] democratic community, which doesn't

[38:22] want to control its own population.

[38:24] It's logical. At some point, if we

[38:27] decided to colonize, to invade, to

[38:29] immigrate thoughtlessly elsewhere, it

[38:31] would be rightly perceived poorly. So

[38:34] here, there is no desire for

[38:35] colonization, since these are

[38:36] individuals who are trying to get by,

[38:37] right? So it has nothing to do with

[38:38] that. But what I mean is that the

[38:39] social phenomenon ends up being just

[38:41] about the same. So there are several

[38:43] things. One, obviously we can better

[38:46] control the borders, and while there is

[38:48] no absolute system, whenever we have

[38:49] made efforts in this regard, we have

[38:51] managed to reduce the flow. Two, we

[38:54] must put an end to this welfare state

[38:56] model which is a vacuum that, that

[38:58] draws in immigration. That is

[39:00] self-evident. Look, I knew the world

[39:01] from before. Look, we didn't just let

[39:03] people, uh, die, uh, from illness.

[39:05] That's not true. On the other hand, we

[39:06] didn't treat the entire world,

[39:07] including people from rich countries,

[39:08] sometimes, for that matter.

[39:09] » We should abolish the for

[39:10] » Yes, of course, we must, we must return

[39:12] to an emergency assistance system, but

[39:14] not some kind of right that means—1.5

[39:16] billion, it costs us 1.5 billion per

[39:18] year—and that you are better treated

[39:20] when you are in an irregular situation

[39:21] than when you are regular, French or

[39:23] not French, that's not even the

[39:25] question, if you're poor, right? That's

[39:27] a reality that, that I live; I chair a

[39:28] hospital board of directors, you talk

[39:30] about it, it's, it's not political,

[39:32] it's not left or right. It is therefore

[39:34] obvious that we must review the welfare

[39:35] state system. It is obvious that we

[39:37] need an international policy, and

[39:39] notably at the European level, to, to

[39:41] control external borders. It is obvious

[39:43] that the, the, the source countries

[39:45] must be able to develop, hence at the

[39:47] time the great initiative of Jean-Luc

[39:50] Borloo, whom you know I am close to,

[39:52] for the electrification and so on of

[39:54] Africa. Well, all these questions, but

[39:55] it is up to the countries to take their

[39:56] destiny into their own hands. When you

[39:58] look at the success of many African

[40:00] countries, for that matter, and many

[40:02] Asian countries, all the countries in

[40:04] those regions of the world that knew

[40:07] how to trust in investing in work have

[40:09] made it out. The best example is Korea.

[40:11] I find that it's something we don't

[40:12] talk about enough. You have the same

[40:14] people, the same history, centuries of

[40:16] shared history. Exactly the same people

[40:18] . And for political reasons, all of a

[40:20] sudden, there's a border. You have one

[40:22] in the north, they are communist, one

[40:23] in the south, they are liberal. You

[40:25] compare the—that doesn't mean there

[40:27] aren't problems in South Korea, but you

[40:29] compare the way of life, the standard

[40:31] of living per capita, the freedoms

[40:33] between North Korea and South Korea.

[40:35] There you go. There you go. So every

[40:36] country can find its own path to

[40:38] development. And I encourage every

[40:39] country to find its own path to

[40:40] development. In any case, what is

[40:42] certain is that the integrity of France

[40:44] must be respected like the integrity of

[40:47] any country on the entire planet, like

[40:49] the integrity of Congo, like the

[40:51] integrity of the United States, the

[40:53] United Arab Emirates, Australia,

[40:55] Ireland, Algeria, Italy. There you go.

[40:57] To talk about the environment, since we

[40:59] don't have that much time left, to talk

[41:01] about the environment and ecological

[41:03] policy, I imagine you are pro-nuclear,

[41:04] that you are for the electrification of

[41:07] France using nuclear power. Uh today,

[41:09] the plants are struggling a bit and we

[41:11] need to build new ones. Do we create an

[41:14] energy mix with renewables? Do we go

[41:17] full nuclear? How how do you foresee it

[41:19] ?

[41:19] » Well, I am truly for the

[41:21] decarbonization of growth. It means

[41:22] human activity absolutely must be

[41:24] decarbonized.

[41:25] » Green growth. Yes, yes, of course. Yes,

[41:27] yes, yes. It's it's where the

[41:29] degrowthers uh have it all wrong,

[41:30] really. It means that we will need a

[41:33] lot of growth to finance the transition

[41:35] and the change, and not degrowth, which

[41:37] is an aberration from every point of

[41:39] view, but I'm not sure we have the time

[41:41] to talk about it. And uh and so for me,

[41:44] I am the pragmatic approach. If one day

[41:46] there is something other than nuclear,

[41:47] well, there will be something other

[41:48] than nuclear. Today, the least

[41:50] carbon-intensive energy of all, the

[41:52] most controllable, the most abundant,

[41:54] and the cheapest—well, there are

[41:56] actually two: nuclear and hydroelectric

[41:58] , like a major dam.

[41:59] » Uh

[42:01] » Uh, so it is obvious—and I have been

[42:02] saying it for years, and I said it at a

[42:04] time when it was less easy—that we

[42:06] must go all-in, given the current state

[42:08] of science, on nuclear and

[42:09] hydroelectric power. It’s a given.

[42:12] Next, we must allow local projects to

[42:14] proceed with renewable energies. I am

[42:16] developing solar energy where I live.

[42:19] We are going to have to use the power

[42:20] of the oceans. Uh, there are all the

[42:23] heating networks. I lead a very

[42:24] pragmatic urban area. We are doing

[42:26] solar, but we are also going to cover

[42:28] the entire urban area with a heating

[42:29] network. For example, we are going to

[42:31] have the largest and the first

[42:33] underground marine energy plant in

[42:35] France. There are very few in Europe

[42:37] that allow us to provide energy. We are

[42:39] reducing energy-related carbon

[42:41] emissions by 70%at a very low price

[42:42] across a large part of the city. We are

[42:44] going to use energy from treated

[42:46] wastewater. So we are very advanced in

[42:48] this regard, very pragmatic and very

[42:49] advanced. But those are local points.

[42:53] Energy is the foundation. If we want to

[42:55] reindustrialize, we need abundant,

[42:57] cheap, decarbonized energy because we

[42:59] are in the 21st century. And so we need

[43:02] an energy backbone, right? When dealing

[43:05] with other subjects where you need

[43:06] spontaneous order, and then in the end

[43:07] the state comes along later

[43:09] » Well, the state—in any case, the

[43:10] state and its private partners—in any

[43:12] case, there must be a backbone, which

[43:14] is what was done in the 60s, and this

[43:16] backbone must be nuclear and

[43:17] hydroelectric today. The mix must not

[43:19] be done, must not be irrational. The

[43:21] mix must not be made to the detriment

[43:23] of what is cheaper and more

[43:24] decarbonized. Nuclear power, even when

[43:27] including construction costs and waste

[43:29] treatment, is more decarbonized than

[43:31] solar and wind power, and furthermore,

[43:33] we master the technologies; we don't

[43:35] import stuff from China. So, it is

[43:38] obvious that we must go all-in on that,

[43:40] that wind power should be implemented

[43:42] when there is local support, when it

[43:44] doesn't concrete everything over,

[43:46] because France has adopted the "net

[43:47] zero artificialization" policy, which

[43:49] is a completely idiotic measure. The

[43:52] goal is good, as always. We must fight

[43:55] against soil artificialization, but we

[43:57] are starting from a top-down vertical

[43:58] system that will be inapplicable, and

[44:00] we are making many exceptions,

[44:02] including the regime for wind turbines,

[44:04] which—I don't know if you've seen the

[44:06] reality of the underground installation

[44:08] of wind turbines—is an incredible

[44:10] amount of concreting. It's an

[44:12] underground Atlantic Wall, not to

[44:14] mention the disfigurement of marine

[44:15] landscapes, for energy that is more

[44:17] expensive and less reliable. Because

[44:20] the problem with what we've called the

[44:23] mix is that we've injected solar and

[44:25] wind power into the energy backbone by

[44:27] giving them priority over nuclear.

[44:31] However, nuclear is not—it's not

[44:33] intermittent. So we turn off nuclear

[44:35] power plants, we turn them back on, and

[44:37] that means our nuclear plants have a

[44:38] much lower utilization rate than

[44:40] elsewhere in the world and a much

[44:41] higher rate of wear and tear. So there

[44:45] absolutely must be priority on the grid

[44:48] for nuclear and hydroelectric, and then

[44:52] local projects for so-called renewable

[44:55] energy—essentially solar today, and

[44:58] wind power as a supplement—to be

[45:01] clear.

[45:03] » Yes, yes, I see, I see very, very well,

[45:04] and it's—and it's very clear.

[45:06] Speaking of the backbone, for energy.

[45:10] In all other areas, are we

[45:12] decentralizing, leaving as much

[45:14] responsibility as possible to the

[45:16] lowest possible level? That's it, just

[45:18] to be sure I understand.

[45:19] » Yes, sub—what we call subsidiarity.

[45:21] Well, not for sovereign functions. I—

[45:24] I am, my next question was: are the

[45:25] French people ready for this? Do you

[45:29] really think that the French, who are

[45:30] used to the sovereign state in

[45:32] particular, but also to having the

[45:33] State accompany them, to having a

[45:35] welfare state around them, are they

[45:36] ready for this? Either way, a choice

[45:39] will have to be made. Either we

[45:41] continue to impoverish ourselves, to

[45:43] lock the poor into poverty, to—to

[45:48] depend on over-indebtedness. I mean,

[45:50] today, what is France? Do you realize

[45:53] that we have an hour of recording,

[45:54] we'll see about that. Perhaps,

[45:57] » But let's imagine it is an hour. While

[45:59] we are recording, the State will have

[46:02] generated 180 million euros in debt.

[46:05] Okay? That's 300,000 euros per minute

[46:07] currently in additional debt.

[46:09] Additional debt, that's 5,000 euros per

[46:11] second. And the absolute cynicism is

[46:13] that you go to a restaurant, you pick

[46:15] out a good wine and everything. By the

[46:17] way, it's getting worse and worse

[46:18] because we have fewer and fewer means,

[46:19] after all. But but in the end, you’re

[46:21] handing the bill to your children and

[46:22] grandchildren, but who can reason like

[46:24] that, saying as long as it lasts a

[46:25] little longer, you know? As long as it

[46:28] lasts just a little longer.

[46:29] » There you go, that’s all dead. It’s

[46:31] it’s cooked. The illusion is dead. So

[46:32] we really must invent other things that

[46:34] provide hope. And the the it’s not

[46:36] the French people who think who think

[46:37] that. Uh, there are a multitude of

[46:40] French people who are, who know very

[46:42] well that work must be better rewarded,

[46:44] that investment must be better rewarded

[46:45] , that we, we must be prosperous and

[46:47] free in the 21st century, that this

[46:49] requires: we can no longer stick to the

[46:51] '45 model because it was based on

[46:52] something else. It was based on

[46:55] enormous productivity gains. It was

[46:57] when we were having a lot of kids. We

[46:58] are going to close 4,000 schools in

[47:00] France in the next 5 years. We are

[47:01] going to open 10,000 nursing homes.

[47:02] It’s it’s it’s a colossal

[47:04] upheaval, uh, between the ecological

[47:07] revolution, the, uh, digital revolution

[47:09] , and the demographic revolution. If we

[47:11] reason like we did 100 years ago,

[47:13] we’re dead. And today the entire

[47:14] political class wants to make us

[47:16] believe that we will return to the

[47:17] glorious thirty years, playing on

[47:19] nostalgia. There was, it was great

[47:20] before. Wonderful. But we need to move

[47:21] on to something else. What we are going

[47:22] to do now will be great. The future,

[47:24] we’re going to seize it, you know.

[47:25] And, uh, there isn't a gene in the

[47:27] French individual that consists of

[47:29] thinking that you have to go to the

[47:30] counter to get an allowance. That is,

[47:32] that is false. It is, it is completely

[47:35] false. The French, the French are

[47:36] rational like all people in the world.

[47:38] So if we create a society where the

[47:40] counter pays more than the job, well,

[47:42] they go to the counter. They aren't

[47:44] stupid. They are, it's rational. But

[47:48] that’s why when I spoke of incentives

[47:50] , of guaranteeing a positive gap for

[47:52] the worker compared to those who

[47:54] don’t work, uh, that’s what will

[47:56] recreate prosperity. Uh, it is truly

[48:00] the, the basis for building the future.

[48:04] » And I, I, uh...

[48:05] » But you speak of prosperity,

[48:06] » We are a nation of entrepreneurs. Uh,

[48:09] look when, when Uber arrived, the

[48:10] number of people who, who suddenly

[48:12] created their, their...well, afterwards

[48:14] , it evolved more or less well, and

[48:15] precariousness too, but what does it

[48:17] matter! There is a fantastic

[48:18] entrepreneurial need, there is a need

[48:20] for freedom, there is a need for

[48:21] independence. I I It's not a majority

[48:22] of French people who are entrepreneurs.

[48:24] There are many, but it's not a majority

[48:25] who are.

[48:25] » Yes, but when you look at the the

[48:27] wishes, it's it's constantly growing.

[48:29] More and more people want to undertake,

[48:31] the relationship to work is going to

[48:33] evolve considerably. So, objectively,

[48:36] I'm not saying we don't need businesses

[48:38] , we need employees, we need, well, I

[48:40] was an employee in my life, I was an

[48:41] entrepreneur, I was both. We were

[48:44] talking about prosperity, but—and you

[48:46] mentioned examples earlier like

[48:48] Thatcher—is there not going to be, if

[48:50] you are elected in 2027, isn't there

[48:51] going to be a moment that will be hard

[48:53] for the French before arriving at

[48:55] prosperity? That is the question. I

[48:57] want to.

[48:58] » I'm not going to, I...I'm not going to

[49:00] cheat on the...the question, but what I

[49:02] want to say is that the hard moment is

[49:04] now and it will be more and more...it's

[49:06] that if we don't...if we remain on all

[49:08] the nuances of...of socialism, of

[49:10] conformism, of technocracy that...that

[49:12] we are sold, or if we go into the

[49:13] adventure of the extremes, it will be

[49:15] even harder. That's it. That...do you

[49:19] pay taxes? I think the pencil is a

[49:22] great success. I wish you well.

[49:24] » Well, I congratulate you on that. Do

[49:26] you know that this year we are paying

[49:28] with our taxes, we are paying seven

[49:30] times more in taxes for just the

[49:32] interest on the state's debt than for

[49:34] the entire justice budget? And we lack

[49:37] prison space and we have

[49:38] multi-recidivists on the streets. No,

[49:40] but do you understand? That is to say

[49:42] that everything you are telling me, I

[49:43] am willing to hear it if things were

[49:45] going well, but things are not going

[49:46] well and will go less and less well.

[49:49] There will be losers when I implement

[49:51] my policy, it will be the whole caste

[49:53] of those who cling to their privileges.

[49:56] Exactly. Yes, they will be losers. A

[49:58] minority. What I was saying is that I'm

[49:59] not for it, but of course not.

[50:01] » But of course not. because by managing

[50:04] to reduce the dead weight of

[50:06] over-administration. Why is it that in

[50:09] Denmark, a highly administered country,

[50:11] there are 24%administrative and

[50:13] technical posts in hospitals, while we

[50:16] have climbed to 35%? Why? It’s not

[50:19] inevitable. There is no inevitability

[50:21] to multiplying management controllers

[50:23] and reporting. I mean, the number of

[50:26] stupid procedures and compliance in a

[50:28] company or a local authority—I spend

[50:31] my life signing folders. Now, when I

[50:32] sign a letter to a resident, I love

[50:34] that. When I validate memos with 47

[50:36] stamps and whatnot, I fight against

[50:38] that. The requirements, the

[50:40] deliberation reports, I have to sign

[50:42] the thing 10 times. I don’t know,

[50:44] maybe there’s a giant cellar in

[50:45] France where we put all these documents

[50:47] . I don’t know where it goes, or

[50:49] maybe incinerators to produce energy.

[50:51] At least that would be useful; the

[50:53] point is, it’s not inevitable. When

[50:55] we succeed in cutting spending—80

[50:57] billion the first year, reaching a

[50:58] cruising speed of 200 billion (we need

[51:00] to hit 300 billion)—we will return 60

[51:02] %, that’s 120 billion of the 200

[51:03] billion in spending cuts, in immediate

[51:05] purchasing power, right away, through

[51:06] lower contributions. Contribute less to

[51:08] earn more. I mean, the first winners

[51:11] will be the people who work, the people

[51:13] who want to get ahead. When we create a

[51:16] funded pension system, the transition

[51:18] will be very complicated, very

[51:19] difficult, because we are currently in

[51:21] budgetary apnea. But it remains that we

[51:24] will ensure that people who earn little

[51:26] money, who have low salaries, will

[51:28] finally own their retirement with a

[51:30] return far superior to the

[51:32] pay-as-you-go system, which is finished

[51:34] , and that’s what will allow us to

[51:36] finance the economy. We will reinvest,

[51:40] we will finally have French investment

[51:41] funds. We won't be dependent on the

[51:44] Americans, the Dutch, the Norwegians,

[51:46] or the United Arab Emirates, who have

[51:49] these immense investment funds.

[51:51] » Exactly. Well, precisely on that note,

[51:55] there is a growing sentiment,

[51:57] especially among the young, that part

[52:00] of the debt we have and must finance in

[52:02] France is due to pensions and the

[52:05] current system, and that a pension

[52:08] reform moving toward capitalization

[52:10] could already alleviate much of the

[52:13] debt we have today. Maybe overall, what

[52:16] I mean is that perhaps this reform

[52:18] alone is enough and no other reforms

[52:19] are needed. Oh no, no, that won't work

[52:21] here. Well, this reform, it's it's

[52:22] unavoidable. I'll come back to the

[52:24] pensions if you like.

[52:27] » But what I mean is that we still have

[52:29] to ask the question of public

[52:31] dysfunction, meaning why you well, the

[52:33] pension system makes up 25%of public

[52:35] spending, so it's colossal. Over a

[52:38] certain period, it was even half of the

[52:40] increase in debt, you know. But

[52:42] regardless, why why is € 1 of taxes

[52:45] in France less effective than € 1 of

[52:48] taxes in almost all other European

[52:51] countries? Why? The problem is that

[52:56] this debate is fundamental, but it

[52:59] shouldn't distract us from the even

[53:01] more fundamental question of the

[53:03] performance of the public sector, which

[53:06] , well, occupies many of my thoughts.

[53:10] It works like in any organization. A

[53:12] head of state should manage the state,

[53:14] not manage society; I mean, they

[53:16] shouldn't tell me what temperature to

[53:18] take my shower at. We even had ads

[53:20] telling us how long to shower and what

[53:21] setting to put the thermostat on.

[53:23] Whether I should wear a turtleneck in

[53:24] winter, how many fruits and vegetables

[53:25] —leave us alone. That's not your

[53:26] problem. It's my problem as an

[53:27] individual. Okay. Well, let them just

[53:29] give us the information. You're yes,

[53:31] it's very much like the Soviet Union.

[53:33] They'll tell you how much

[53:34] » No, but through the energy backbone,

[53:36] perhaps if it's the state controlling

[53:37] that

[53:38] » But I didn't say the state should

[53:39] control the energy backbone. I said the

[53:40] citizen sees their energy bill and they

[53:42] will optimize their behavior all by

[53:44] themselves. They don't need it. I mean,

[53:46] the state doesn't know how to manage

[53:47] money. It takes more than elsewhere and

[53:49] it runs higher deficits than elsewhere.

[53:50] And it wants to explain to us how we

[53:52] should live. But it's less capable than

[53:53] we are. Honestly, get rid of this idea

[53:55] that's been shoved down our throats for

[53:57] years in France, which consists of

[53:59] saying that the larger the entity, the

[54:01] more state-run, the more effective it

[54:03] is. It's not true. I am for a state

[54:04] that is strong in its sovereign duties.

[54:06] So, it should worry less about what

[54:07] doesn't concern it, especially our

[54:09] private lives. Next, pensions. There is

[54:12] obviously the need to acknowledge that

[54:14] the pay-as-you-go system relied on

[54:16] three pillars, as I said earlier: labor

[54:18] immigration, productivity gains, but

[54:21] above all, a high birth rate. It is a

[54:23] broad pyramid of contributors. We

[54:26] aren't having children anymore.

[54:27] Therefore, the pay-as-you-go system

[54:29] cannot last, and even today, it is

[54:31] largely kept on budget life support by

[54:33] the taxpayer. Even today, we have the

[54:35] highest contributions in the world. We

[54:39] spend three points more than Germany on

[54:41] pensions. Yet our pensions are not that

[54:43] high. That is the whole paradox. And

[54:45] the system is exploding and doing so to

[54:46] the detriment of the young and the

[54:47] working population. Therefore, we need

[54:49] a mandatory tier of funded pensions.

[54:51] For pensions of at least € 2,000, we

[54:53] will have to stop indexing them in

[54:55] order to manage a transition. We will

[54:57] have to review this whole system, but

[54:59] there are also many retirees who are

[55:01] struggling and having a hard time; I

[55:02] see many of them.

[55:04] » That is the worry with reforming this

[55:05] system, too: making the young wealthier

[55:07] but paradoxically impoverishing the

[55:08] retirees if we go through with it.

[55:10] » No, but we will have to—I am on the

[55:12] liberal side—we do not call into

[55:13] question a contract that has been

[55:15] signed. So, a contract signed by people

[55:18] back then, a social contract, must be

[55:20] honored. But the issue, and you know

[55:23] what is crazy, is that I recently heard

[55:26] people in green-left politics saying

[55:27] that we should have fewer children to

[55:30] save the planet. It was even in a

[55:33] Nathan guide, a Nathan school textbook

[55:35] from 2000, that said the most effective

[55:37] way to preserve the planet is to have

[55:39] fewer children. Can you imagine the

[55:41] brainwashing we are doing to our kids?

[55:43] But these are the same people who are

[55:45] against funded pensions and say we must

[55:46] keep the pay-as-you-go system. Yet, the

[55:49] pay-as-you-go system can only work, it

[55:51] can only make sense, if we have more

[55:53] children; it was designed at a time

[55:55] when there were 4.7, almost 5, workers

[55:58] per retiree. Today, we are at 1.7. So,

[56:01] these people who say both that we must

[56:02] keep the system as it is, even though

[56:04] it is bankrupt, and not to have

[56:06] children—I think they shouldn't even

[56:07] have the right to a pension. We have to

[56:10] be consistent, because I have kids, I

[56:12] want my kids to have kids, and I don't

[56:13] want those who have children to bring

[56:15] little debtors into the world who will

[56:17] be saddled with debt to pay for the

[56:18] retirement of those who are against

[56:20] birth. As long as we don't pay the debt

[56:23] , it's fine, but kids with a big debt

[56:27] on their shoulders. Whose fault is it?

[56:30] The politician's.

[56:31] » The politician is a Frenchman with a

[56:32] mandate, you know.

[56:33] » Yeah, but

[56:34] » Let's never forget that. Fault, I don't

[56:37] like, I don't...fault is for everyone

[56:39] to say. I don't know. What I mean is

[56:40] that today, we have to change all of

[56:41] that. There you go.

[56:42] » The French have the feeling that it's

[56:43] the politicians 'fault. That's why I'm

[56:44] saying it. It's the politicians who are

[56:46] precisely putting the country. Well,

[56:49] the country has been poorly managed for

[56:51] too long, that's for sure. So the

[56:54] politicians, no, the politicians, I'll

[56:56] paraphrase Simone de Beauvoir. Uh, one

[56:58] is not born a politician, one becomes

[57:00] one, there you go. Uh, there you go.

[57:03] » And maybe it's in becoming one that we

[57:04] ...But no, what I mean is there has

[57:05] been a problem with the quality of the

[57:07] representatives, you know, that's for

[57:08] sure. But the constituents chose them

[57:10] too, you know. Anyway, so we're not

[57:11] going to dwell on the past. Uh, and

[57:14] then it's really a system of a system.

[57:19] Meaning the system today, as it has

[57:21] evolved based on the emotional, for

[57:23] which every French person also has a

[57:25] responsibility. Uh, for every news

[57:28] event, we made a law, we piled on an

[57:30] extra layer of regulation, and so on.

[57:33] Resulting today in this textual

[57:35] harassment that I mentioned earlier, a

[57:38] hyperinflation of texts. We went from

[57:40] 100,000 words in the environmental code

[57:42] . 12 years ago to 1,200,000 words today

[57:44] , uh, things that are inapplicable and

[57:46] don't defend the environment. And if it

[57:48] actually helped the environment, at

[57:49] least it would be understandable, but,

[57:50] uh, the principles of environmental

[57:51] defense, we've known them for a long

[57:52] time. That the polluter must be

[57:54] sanctioned, we must not threaten the

[57:55] ecosystem, and so on and so forth. Well

[57:57] , and, uh, so what is needed today is

[58:00] to change those who govern, but also to

[58:02] change the governance as I mentioned

[58:05] earlier.

[58:05] » To change, and I'm coming back to the

[58:07] transition, it takes time. In reality,

[58:09] if you are elected, you have 5 years,

[58:11] you won't be able to do everything you

[58:12] want in 5 years. Maybe, maybe you have

[58:14] the ambition to do it in 5 years. But

[58:15] how do you do it? Because like all the

[58:17] predecessors of political figures who

[58:19] have been presidents, in the end, time

[58:20] is also what they lack to give great

[58:22] answers.

[58:23] » Several things. First, I think you need

[58:24] to have character. You must not be

[58:26] obsessed with your image and your

[58:28] popularity.

[58:29] » Are you not?

[58:30] » No. Truly, no. There you go. A

[58:33] political figure without being full of

[58:34] themselves. No, no, but I'm not the

[58:35] only one. I know plenty of mayors and

[58:36] such. They have, in the sense that, no,

[58:39] it's always wonderful to feel love and

[58:41] support, right? But if you're in

[58:43] politics to be loved, you should just

[58:45] get a cocker spaniel. It's

[58:47] » No, because furthermore, it distorts

[58:48] your personality. So yes, I think so,

[58:50] but I won't name them, though there are

[58:52] some I like a lot, by the way. But what

[58:54] you need to do is seek to be respected.

[58:56] It's the difference between trying to

[58:57] convince and trying to seduce. I don't

[58:59] seek to seduce, I seek to convince.

[59:00] There is PR all the time, of course.

[59:02] It's obvious, well, but it's very, very

[59:05] important to try to bring people along.

[59:09] I see it in my municipality, where

[59:10] there was never a mayor elected in the

[59:12] first round. I was elected, re-elected.

[59:14] Maybe if I run again, I'll get crushed,

[59:16] I don't know. But there are people who

[59:18] don't entirely agree with me, who don't

[59:20] like my personality, but there is an

[59:21] alignment between what I say, who I am,

[59:23] and what I do, and that is truly the

[59:24] foundation. For that reason, I wrote a

[59:26] book about Pompidou with Christophe

[59:28] Tardieu; that was really what made him

[59:30] inspire such trust. He was the most

[59:31] popular president during those 5 years.

[59:33] He was present, since he died after 5

[59:35] years, and at the time, that was it.

[59:37] But it's because there was an alignment

[59:40] , and I think that is very important.

[59:42] Then, you must say things from the

[59:44] start, beforehand, of course, because

[59:46] you mustn't catch people by surprise.

[59:49] You have to be credible; you have to

[59:50] say, "Here, if I am in power, here is

[59:51] what I will do." Above all, people must

[59:54] not feel dispossessed of power the day

[59:55] after you are elected. That's what has

[59:57] happened very often. Hence the

[59:59] necessity, I think, to evolve the

[1:00:01] institutions and to facilitate the

[1:00:03] popular initiative referendum. I look a

[1:00:05] lot at what is happening in Switzerland

[1:00:06] . I find it to be a very interesting

[1:00:08] model in several areas. Uh, next, with

[1:00:10] the people working around me, we are

[1:00:12] working on a massive plan for the first

[1:00:14] few months. It sounds a bit cliché,

[1:00:16] but it's essential. I go back to

[1:00:17] General de Gaulle in '58. In '58,

[1:00:20] between de Gaulle as President of the

[1:00:22] Council when René Coty left power and

[1:00:24] de Gaulle of the 5th Republic, 8 or 9

[1:00:25] months passed. A very interesting

[1:00:28] period with Pinay and Rueff. He

[1:00:30] launched the Rueff plan of extreme

[1:00:32] radicality. He completely turned around

[1:00:34] public accounts. He set the country

[1:00:35] back on track.

[1:00:36] » That's what you want to do.

[1:00:37] » 335 ordinances in less than 9 months.

[1:00:39] 335 ordinances in less than 9 months.

[1:00:41] So, I am working on a massive project

[1:00:43] around the three axes I mentioned

[1:00:45] earlier. A major law to liberate the

[1:00:47] economy, a major policy to restore

[1:00:49] order, a major policy of educational

[1:00:51] and scientific ambition, and therefore

[1:00:53] with referendums when necessary,

[1:00:55] organic laws when necessary, ordinances

[1:00:57] when necessary, and ordinary laws when

[1:00:59] necessary. That's why we have to

[1:01:00] prepare for the legislative elections

[1:01:01] too.

[1:01:02] » Do you believe in your election today?

[1:01:03] Well,

[1:01:04] » I wouldn't be here with you otherwise.

[1:01:07] » Yes, but I ask you the question because

[1:01:09] there was the debate at the MEDEF where

[1:01:12] you were not among the main ones. You

[1:01:14] had a debate with Fab Roussel, much

[1:01:16] better, by the way,

[1:01:18] » Thanks to Fabien Roussel. But no, but

[1:01:19] at least we had two, plus, I mean, I

[1:01:21] respect Fabien Roussel a lot. We had

[1:01:23] already hosted him.

[1:01:24] » There you go, I have no issues, he is a

[1:01:26] communist. I am for freedom. Well,

[1:01:28] there you go, so we have two

[1:01:29] contradictory visions, but we talked

[1:01:30] about it in the rest.

[1:01:31] » But precisely, because of that, some

[1:01:33] media consider you a "small candidate,"

[1:01:35] I don't like that expression, but

[1:01:37] anyway, it means what it means. Do you

[1:01:40] believe in the polls? How do you

[1:01:41] position yourself for the presidential

[1:01:43] election? How do we act, then, in your

[1:01:45] position? How do you prepare for the

[1:01:46] presidential election?

[1:01:46] » Well, in life, you know, you need

[1:01:48] belief. We are always—the human being

[1:01:51] is spiritual, we need love, we need

[1:01:53] faith, we need hope. Very well. But in

[1:01:56] this case, I try not to be in the realm

[1:01:57] of belief. I am like when I take the

[1:02:00] start of a marathon.

[1:02:02] » No, and if you want to be realistic,

[1:02:04] I'm not doing this for—well, that

[1:02:05] would annoy some politicians who like

[1:02:07] it when I say it, but it's not a

[1:02:09] question of wanting it or not, contrary

[1:02:10] to me, because everyone says the one

[1:02:12] who wants it the most, whatever. If you

[1:02:15] do it just because you want to, it

[1:02:16] feels a bit adolescent, you know. So,

[1:02:18] it's a...I feel like I'm, well, I don't

[1:02:21] feel illegitimate. I long thought that

[1:02:25] I, that this wasn't my world.

[1:02:27] » Yeah.

[1:02:28] » And that if I go for it, it's because I

[1:02:29] no longer identified with the political

[1:02:31] options. I get the feeling there's a

[1:02:33] big, that there's no lack of political

[1:02:34] demand in France. That's what makes me,

[1:02:37] that's what makes me think we can

[1:02:39] really govern the country effectively

[1:02:41] again. It's that a large part of the

[1:02:44] population, not the ones we hear

[1:02:45] protesting, the professionals of

[1:02:47] righteous indignation, the social media

[1:02:49] mobs, it's...I had the same ones 40

[1:02:50] years ago, with the red balloons and

[1:02:52] all that, telling you about the protest

[1:02:54] , the thing, well, Pavlovian responses.

[1:02:57] No, the majority of people who live

[1:02:59] their lives, who are humble, who are

[1:03:00] discreet, what I call the real people,

[1:03:02] it's this beautiful France that wants

[1:03:04] to rediscover the great France. I want,

[1:03:06] I am, I'm proposing the great France.

[1:03:08] So I think there is no problem with

[1:03:09] political demand. There is a majority

[1:03:11] political demand that is orphaned from

[1:03:12] a clear and distinct political proposal

[1:03:14] . There is still supply, it's just

[1:03:16] scattered. That's why I proposed a

[1:03:17] primary, something like that.

[1:03:18] » And my problem, you're right, is that

[1:03:20] today I don't appear like the people

[1:03:22] who can win. I'm aware of all that, you

[1:03:23] know. I'm not going to give you some

[1:03:25] super dynamic pitch. I have momentum,

[1:03:27] but this momentum is starting from zero

[1:03:29] , so yes, there is momentum. Yes, but

[1:03:31] is it—well, people tell me I should

[1:03:33] never say that, but I don't care, it's

[1:03:35] the reality. But I feel good about the

[1:03:37] approach, with some irony and

[1:03:39] self-deprecation too.

[1:03:40] » Does that allow you to be freer as well

[1:03:41] , perhaps?

[1:03:41] » Yeah. And yes. And above all, I—when

[1:03:43] we really work, I really work, I truly

[1:03:45] work. There you go. I

[1:03:47] » I, I really work. I don't know how else

[1:03:50] to tell you. It's that I accept a

[1:03:51] counterargument if it's a

[1:03:52] counterargument based on substance. Not

[1:03:54] if it's just a posture or a belief. Yes

[1:03:57] , but not if it's just chanting slogans

[1:03:59] . Exactly. And I, it's like a

[1:04:02] competition when I, when I sign up for

[1:04:04] a trail run or a marathon or a

[1:04:06] half-marathon or whatever. Well, I go

[1:04:09] for it, I try to get the best time

[1:04:11] possible. I'm going there to win the

[1:04:12] marathon, that I can't do. But, you see

[1:04:14] , when I when I ran for the municipal

[1:04:16] elections in Cannes, people explained

[1:04:18] to me quite learnedly for a long time

[1:04:20] that it wasn't for me.

[1:04:21] » Right, for a very long time. Uh, they

[1:04:24] told me later there was another

[1:04:25] candidate, the UMP hadn't endorsed me,

[1:04:27] and then, "Yes, but you..." No, wait,

[1:04:29] commerce was at once too popular but

[1:04:31] also too intellectual. Basically, they

[1:04:34] criticized everything at the same time.

[1:04:35] Well, and then finally I went for it

[1:04:37] and it worked. I didn't take a

[1:04:39] ministerial post that brought instant

[1:04:41] notoriety. But all the better, it

[1:04:43] bothers this caste, this conformism.

[1:04:46] All the better, I want to shatter this

[1:04:47] conformism. It's making the country

[1:04:49] lose, it betrays people, it's

[1:04:51] unconscious, but they all think the

[1:04:52] same. You see it clearly, you feel

[1:04:55] exactly what I'm saying. There's the

[1:04:56] same language, there's the same way of

[1:04:58] being. Even when they try to act cool,

[1:05:00] they make the cover of a popular

[1:05:01] magazine, they put their jacket over

[1:05:03] their shoulder, with the kids, and we

[1:05:04] pose looking at the thing,

[1:05:06] » They're serving fries now. Yes, but I

[1:05:08] don't even want to go there, but there

[1:05:10] have been worse things; well, maybe the

[1:05:12] moment was nice too, I don't know. So I

[1:05:15] saw that, but see, even the language.

[1:05:18] So sometimes they play the wise, a bit

[1:05:20] knowing, a bit solemn because of the

[1:05:22] war around Europe, and then they play

[1:05:24] the cool guy, and so on. I don't play

[1:05:26] games, I'm just having fun. I have

[1:05:28] self-deprecation, but on the other hand

[1:05:30] , I don't have a rehearsed speech.

[1:05:33] Afterwards, I try to adapt not the

[1:05:35] substance of my speech, but sometimes

[1:05:37] the form depending on the people.

[1:05:39] That's normal. But you won't catch me

[1:05:42] saying the opposite from one place to

[1:05:44] another. There you go. I...

[1:05:46] » But will you remain the mayor of Cannes

[1:05:48] ?

[1:05:48] » If I am President of the Republic?

[1:05:49] » Yes. No, if you are not President of

[1:05:50] the Republic,

[1:05:51] » Well, I...the capital will be in Cannes

[1:05:52] because I want to live by the

[1:05:53] Mediterranean. There you go. But I

[1:05:55] think many French people would

[1:05:57] appreciate the fact that there's some

[1:05:58] ...

[1:05:58] » I wouldn't be doing the people of

[1:05:59] Cannes a favor, unfortunately.

[1:06:01] » Yes, it wouldn't be, yes...

[1:06:03] » Or no, it actually wouldn't be good.

[1:06:05] » But no, I wanted to know if you are

[1:06:06] going to run for the legislative

[1:06:07] elections if the elected president

[1:06:09] dissolves the National Assembly. Are

[1:06:12] you, well, Nouvelle Énergie is

[1:06:14] preparing legislative candidacies. We

[1:06:17] will be very present in the legislative

[1:06:19] elections, especially if I win the

[1:06:20] presidential, we will need a majority

[1:06:22] afterward. So we will prepare for all

[1:06:23] of that. I, I have, I have, my mandate

[1:06:27] is mayor. There you go.

[1:06:29] » Mayor or president?

[1:06:30] » Yes, because I, I want to be the boss.

[1:06:32] » No, but you understand, it's, it's, uh,

[1:06:34] again, I was told I shouldn't say that.

[1:06:37] But

[1:06:38] » Because, because if you want, what,

[1:06:40] what interests me in life is not having

[1:06:41] a title; I've said it before, I'm not

[1:06:43] looking for lines on a CV or retirement

[1:06:44] points. I am lucky to be at a stage in

[1:06:47] my life where I've done things and

[1:06:49] things are going pretty well personally

[1:06:51] . What interests me is really being

[1:06:53] useful. It's creating a, creating a

[1:06:56] team for France, just like I have a

[1:06:57] municipal team. It's creating a

[1:06:59] collective while assuming my

[1:07:01] responsibility as a boss, because a

[1:07:02] boss is someone who tries to...I have

[1:07:04] always, in my life, learned this: I was

[1:07:06] lucky to start from not much and meet

[1:07:08] some great people. Who? I've had a lot

[1:07:10] of luck. I had Jacques Pélissard, who

[1:07:12] had some experience in politics and

[1:07:13] trained me, who was a great legal

[1:07:14] expert; I had Bernard Rocon, who was a

[1:07:16] great boss and was mayor of Caen, and

[1:07:17] so on. And there's one thing I've

[1:07:19] learned all the time: first, you have

[1:07:21] to work, uh, you shouldn't take

[1:07:23] yourself too seriously while working

[1:07:25] very seriously, and above all, you must

[1:07:27] look for people more competent than

[1:07:29] yourself. So I find them easily, which

[1:07:32] says it's concerning for me, but I've

[1:07:34] spent my life surrounding myself—when

[1:07:36] I was an employee, I looked for work,

[1:07:38] and then at some point, it shifted to

[1:07:40] where I could choose. And, and when you

[1:07:44] , when you trust someone, it pays off

[1:07:46] much more to trust than to be paranoid.

[1:07:50] You need a little paranoia because, as

[1:07:51] Woody Allen said, it's not because

[1:07:53] you're paranoid that you don't have

[1:07:54] enemies. That makes me laugh a lot. But

[1:07:58] so, you see, being a parliamentarian is

[1:08:01] magnificent, right? Making the law, and

[1:08:04] so on, it can be very interesting. But,

[1:08:07] but really, in my life, what interested

[1:08:09] me was being a minister. Being a

[1:08:11] minister can be very rewarding,

[1:08:13] provided you admire the person above

[1:08:15] you.

[1:08:15] » Provided you have a ministry where you

[1:08:17] can actually make decisions.

[1:08:19] » If it’s just about having a flashing

[1:08:20] police escort, a clerk serving you,

[1:08:22] doing PR stunts, and commenting on the

[1:08:23] news, the weather, and such—because

[1:08:25] that’s what ministers are 9 times out

[1:08:26] of 10 today—it doesn’t interest me.

[1:08:29] It doesn’t interest me.

[1:08:30] » Yes, it interests me—well, especially

[1:08:31] since the dissolution, it doesn’t

[1:08:33] interest me.

[1:08:33] » So, in my view, there are individual

[1:08:35] factors, you know; we make sacrifices,

[1:08:37] but there are still individual

[1:08:39] principles of personal fulfillment. If

[1:08:41] you could implement just one measure,

[1:08:43] perhaps as president, or potentially as

[1:08:45] a minister, or I don’t know. Perhaps

[1:08:49] you will carry this voice through the

[1:08:50] New Energy deputies; if there is just

[1:08:52] one measure, you look toward 2100 or

[1:08:54] 2150, perhaps the very distant future

[1:08:55] of France, and say, "That is my legacy.

[1:08:57] " What would it be? What I would like

[1:09:00] people to remember about my work is

[1:09:02] that France became a more prosperous,

[1:09:03] freer, and more just country. It’s

[1:09:06] about justice. The rest is just a sum

[1:09:07] of measures. So, when—if I am elected

[1:09:09] President of the Republic, because "

[1:09:11] when I am president" sounds a bit too

[1:09:12] presidential, there—I will

[1:09:13] immediately appoint a Chief Human

[1:09:14] Resources Officer for the State. Right

[1:09:16] away; there is no State HR director,

[1:09:18] there is no career management. It's not

[1:09:19] true. People tell you there are huge HR

[1:09:22] costs at the State level. But it might

[1:09:24] seem silly, yet that is how we will

[1:09:25] turn the country around. Uh,

[1:09:27] immediately I will launch a

[1:09:28] construction plan for prison cells or

[1:09:30] agreements with neighboring countries.

[1:09:32] Uh, anyway, we are coming back to what

[1:09:33] I was saying earlier. Immediately, I

[1:09:34] will liberate the school system and

[1:09:35] reinstate a common core curriculum.

[1:09:36] There. Immediately, I will reintroduce

[1:09:38] and include philosophy from primary

[1:09:39] school, because in the 21st century,

[1:09:40] with robots, we will need to learn how

[1:09:42] to decode the world. We will need to

[1:09:43] learn critical thinking more than ever.

[1:09:45] Immediately, I will create this

[1:09:46] mandatory differential of at least €

[1:09:48] 500 between salaries. There you go, you

[1:09:50] know, sometimes it’s not a bad thing

[1:09:51] if people don’t remember much,

[1:09:53] because in fact, for a president, it

[1:09:54] means things weren’t going so badly,

[1:09:55] if you see what I mean.

[1:09:57] » Thank you very much. We still have the

[1:09:59] envelope that's been here from the

[1:10:01] beginning. Would you agree to open it?

[1:10:03] » But I find there's a paradox; it says "

[1:10:04] confidential," so if I open it, because

[1:10:06] there are still people watching us who

[1:10:08] have seen "confidential" until now, so

[1:10:09] ...

[1:10:09] » But from the end, it's no longer

[1:10:11] confidential. If you want to open it,

[1:10:12] you can open it; if you don't want to

[1:10:13] open it...

[1:10:14] » My great temptation is to tell you no,

[1:10:16] out of a spirit of provocation, but I

[1:10:18] think if you put it there, it's because

[1:10:20] you have curiosity. Exactly.

[1:10:21] » We all have the curiosity to know. But

[1:10:23] » Well, you know, come on. Name a living

[1:10:28] person whom you sincerely think would

[1:10:30] make a better president than you. I

[1:10:35] shouldn't have seen the envelope.

[1:10:38] » There, you have to answer now.

[1:10:39] » But no, it's because let's imagine one

[1:10:42] comes to my mind.

[1:10:43] » But it could be someone who isn't a

[1:10:44] candidate for this, but I don't want to

[1:10:46] give ideas. Some already think we

[1:10:47] aren't numerous enough. Frankly, there

[1:10:50] are tons of us. Well, but the problem

[1:10:52] is that I have plenty who come to mind,

[1:10:54] but I won't tell you. There, that will

[1:10:55] be my ultimate freedom. Very well. Yeah

[1:11:01] , I thought you were going to tell me

[1:11:02] you'd say Francis Lalanne, but no, he's

[1:11:04] a candidate.

[1:11:05] » Yes, yes, that's true. But maybe

[1:11:07] » No, but I'm sure there are...so, I

[1:11:08] don't know if they would be better than

[1:11:10] me, because you have to be a bit sure

[1:11:12] of yourself, but people who, you see,

[1:11:14] people who manage to do simple things,

[1:11:16] to get results while managing

[1:11:17] complexity. I don't know, it hasn't

[1:11:19] always worked, but I'll take an example

[1:11:22] to surprise you, but I don't know,

[1:11:23] maybe Arsène Wenger.

[1:11:25] » Or

[1:11:26] » Okay, I would like to have people like

[1:11:27] that in my French team too, well, I

[1:11:29] have some who are joining me, great

[1:11:30] people.

[1:11:31] » People who come from sports.

[1:11:33] » From sports, yes, from sports, I have a

[1:11:34] lot of them. But people who, in

[1:11:37] addition, in sports, or in the arts, or

[1:11:39] in business, or in the non-profit

[1:11:41] sector, uh, in charity, uh, have

[1:11:43] managed complexity. You know, when,

[1:11:46] when, and here too, it's, when, it's

[1:11:48] complex, but Edgar Morin, the late

[1:11:50] Edgar Morin, said: "The round ball is a

[1:11:54] means of universal communication," but

[1:11:56] football too, football can be the worst

[1:11:58] , the money side, stuff, the violence,

[1:12:00] and can be the best.

[1:12:02] » In any case, there's nothing more

[1:12:03] selective. Everyone plays football, the

[1:12:04] whole planet; it's the most global

[1:12:06] phenomenon. And when you look at how

[1:12:08] football clubs are organized, the

[1:12:10] selection of talent, high-level sports

[1:12:12] don't lie; if you're not good, it shows

[1:12:14] immediately on the field. There are

[1:12:18] worlds where people cheat. In

[1:12:19] high-level sports, that doesn't happen.

[1:12:21] But high-level sport needs a popular

[1:12:23] base. So it's exactly the metaphor we

[1:12:25] need to launch the country. So we must

[1:12:27] ensure that everyone can have access to

[1:12:28] playing sports. But we must also ensure

[1:12:30] that the processes for creating elites

[1:12:32] aren't reserved for the same social

[1:12:33] class. In football, you can play, even

[1:12:36] your build can change and so on. And

[1:12:39] you see the complexity of creating a

[1:12:41] sports club, managing to get results

[1:12:43] even if you have much larger financial

[1:12:46] resources than others, and even then,

[1:12:48] it gets complicated. So yes, I mention

[1:12:51] Arsène Wenger because he also has ties

[1:12:53] to Cannes, though he's Alsatian, but I

[1:12:55] find people like that fantastic. It’s

[1:12:57] what, well, what Yanick Borot

[1:12:59] understands very well, what Alexandre

[1:13:00] Jardin understands; it's this whole

[1:13:02] country, this abundance that is

[1:13:03] actually very effective, integrating

[1:13:05] hundreds of thousands of young people.

[1:13:07] » Hm.

[1:13:08] » Today, we fail more than a million

[1:13:09] young people in the French system every

[1:13:11] year. So we will have to use all the

[1:13:14] levers, companies; a company's capacity

[1:13:16] for integration is fantastic. It is

[1:13:19] perhaps the primary source of

[1:13:20] integration along with sports clubs and

[1:13:22] artistic practice. When I developed

[1:13:24] arts and cultural education, I believed

[1:13:26] in it deeply. When you go to all,

[1:13:28] especially to difficult neighborhoods,

[1:13:30] but in all neighborhoods, you have a

[1:13:31] kid learn a musical instrument,

[1:13:34] » It's a wonderful discipline of effort,

[1:13:37] self-control, sacrifice, and

[1:13:39] fulfillment. It’s all there. So yes,

[1:13:43] people like that, they would make

[1:13:44] excellent Presidents of the Republic,

[1:13:46] of course. Very good examples. Thank

[1:13:48] you.

[1:13:49] » Thank you for staying until the end. If

[1:13:50] you're too impatient, you can already

[1:13:52] watch our other episodes that we've

[1:13:53] already published on the channel. We

[1:13:55] are putting suggestions on the screen

[1:13:56] that might interest you. Remember to

[1:13:58] like the video before you go. Bye!

Untitled meeting

Transcript