Police in Clichy-sous-Bois, near Paris, November 2, 2005 (AFP / File / Thomas Coex)
Q: Ten years later, what assessment do you draw from the promotion neighborhoods
A:. “The living environment has changed, the also built but people are always more or less in the same situation The social component n ‘ not engaged on urban shutters. The social mix is still the current doctrine but who wants to live in Clichy, or put his children in school in the area? Moreover, ethnic concentrations did not decrease . The insecurity and trafficking pollute everyday life.
What I see on the ground is that not as much as today’s urban policy has been perceived as a Leatherheads market where basically we speak of participation more than it does. In some neighborhoods there is nothing, no social center or public services, or friendly tenants … Desertification is such that there is a stall.
Especially today the language of politicians, actors, not at all correspond to that of the inhabitants of cities. Some speak of fight against inequalities or participation, other respect, discrimination, reactions vis-à-vis Islam … It just speeches to be heard by elites if not reassuring messages like + everything is fine, integration continues to operate + “
Q: How to reduce this divide
A:”. As for the government, the action is always thinking from top to bottom. Take “citizens councils”: it is not serious to want to promote the involvement of people choosing the on electoral lists, while a significant part of the population is not present
<. p> This exacerbates the stall, with a discredited institutions, a distrust of the political and social forms of internal organization rather take the form of withdrawal, the family, the community …
We need to change software. The potential of these neighborhoods is largely underexploited and instead of returning people to the standard, their deficits, make sure to co-construct with them.
The other problem is the lack of players who are able to bring in a somewhat sustainable actions or claims. “
Q: Is there a risk of a repeat today comparable to 2005 riots
A:” The 2005 riots were an event quite exceptional, in terms of scale, duration and violence. It is true that the context was quite particular, with statements on the Kärcher, cleaning cities …
A riot is a short circuit which has a political significance in that it clarifies things. We saw after 2005: the awareness favored an acceleration of urban renewal. But once public order has returned, one tires quickly enough, it gets lost in the bureaucratic complexities until the next riot.
The means are lacking. Where is the political will? Where are the political interventions in neighborhoods?
The riots, basically, are the only way to be heard. But this aspect is perhaps trying to discard too, because we realize that making the riot is not used much except get the cops to back.
This is why we will probably not the 2005 riots bis. Others, perhaps. We must not forget that all this is part of a widespread lackluster environment. We are in a political situation that makes it difficult to advance the field of the suburbs, the National Front in the heart of the debate, uninhibited right, a left that denies, extreme left of phase … Basically neighborhoods that are a sounding board for more general problems. “
Interview by Claire GALLEN
Copyright © 2015 AFP. All rights reproduction and distribution reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment