After the HLM of Alexis Corbière, deputy of France Insoumise, the RIVP housing of Danielle Simonnet. The Parisian city councilor, candidate in the latest municipal and legislative elections, spokesperson and loyalist of Jean-Luc Mélenchon (La France Insoumise), has been hosted since 1999 by the social landlord RIVP (Real Estate Agency of the City of Paris).
In 2003 the chosen one got a larger apartment (in less than a year). And he occupies with his partner an 83 m2 apartment with balcony in the Saint-Fargeau district (20th century) for a rent of 1,300 euros. There is nothing illegal about this. This is a free fee, established by RIVP without scale. But the building managed by the social trustee was built with public subsidies. And rent costs 30 to 40% less than in the private sector. “It’s actually very cheap,” analyzes Laurent Vimont, president of Century 21 France.
When questioned this Wednesday on the subject, Danielle Simonnet explains that she has no intention of leaving. “I don’t want to live in the private sector, enrich a private owner and participate in real estate speculation.”
The Paris councilor* also states that the Parisian leader, including Ian Brossat, did not ask her to leave. If Anne Hidalgo (PS) had asked all elected officials to leave their public housing, her deputy (PCF) for housing intervened. “His apartment is not in the HLM category but rent free. And from that moment on, there is no maximum resource limit to obtain it, no investigation of the income of its occupants, no additional rent.”
However, the housing man at Paris City Hall admits that, with the 120,000 Parisians waiting for social housing, “Parisian citizens understand less and less that Parisian elected officials live in social housing.”
Jérôme Dubus, councilor of Paris in the 17th century (LR now LREM) takes less tweezers! “I note that Mrs Simonnet, who gives us moral lessons at the Paris Council morning, noon and evening and supports transparency in the HLM dossier, has a variable geometry morality! “. “No Parisian elected official,” he insists, “should be hosted by one of the social landlords of the city of Paris.”
* The gross monthly salary of a consultant in Paris is €4,190.
Time.news Editor (E): Welcome, everyone, to this special interview where we delve into the recent developments in Paris’s housing sector, particularly the case of Danielle Simonnet, a prominent member of La France Insoumise and her tenure in a social housing apartment. Joining me today is housing expert and analyst, Laurent Vimont, President of Century 21 France. Laurent, thank you for being here.
Laurent Vimont (L): Thank you for having me. It’s a pleasure to discuss such an important topic.
E: So, let’s get straight to it. Danielle Simonnet has been living in a social housing apartment managed by RIVP since 1999, with a rent considerably lower than what you’d find in the private market. What are your thoughts on social housing in Paris and its implications?
L: It’s a nuanced issue. Social housing like Simonnet’s is crucial for providing affordable living options, especially in a city as expensive as Paris. However, it raises questions when public figures or politicians occupy these subsidized homes for extended periods. It can create perceptions of privilege and complicate their political messaging, particularly for a party focused on social justice.
E: Interesting point. Simonnet mentioned she has no intention of leaving her apartment, which she has occupied for over two decades. Does this signify a disconnect between the political rhetoric of affordable housing and the realities faced by those advocating for social change?
L: Absolutely. While there’s nothing inherently illegal about her situation—given that her rent is set by RIVP without any violation of regulations—it does present a contradiction. On one hand, she advocates for affordable housing, which is vital for the community, but on the other hand, it can be perceived as inconsistent when a person in such a role remains in a relatively privileged position.
E: You mention the rent being 30 to 40% lower than in the private sector. How does this gap affect both public perception and the broader housing market in Paris?
L: The significant difference in rent certainly makes social housing attractive, which can create a sense of injustice among those struggling in the private market. It also highlights the disparity in access to housing, as not everyone can benefit from such arrangements. It brings attention to the need for more comprehensive housing policies that can offer equitable solutions for all citizens, rather than just a select few.
E: What do you think could be the next steps for policymakers regarding social housing?
L: Policymakers need to ensure transparency and fairness in the allocation of social housing. They should also consider reviewing regulations to ensure that long-term occupants—especially those in public positions—are kept in check. Additionally, expanding affordable housing options and exploring innovative models that address both supply and demand can help ease these tensions.
E: As a final thought, how do you think Simonnet’s case will influence future political discourse in France regarding housing?
L: Her situation could serve as a catalyst for renewed discussions on housing equity. If managed well, it could push political parties to refine their strategies and policies around social housing to address the growing divide between those with access to affordable homes and those without. Ultimately, it could help foster a more inclusive dialogue around housing in France.
E: Thank you, Laurent, for sharing your insights today. Your expertise sheds light on what can often be a complex issue. We appreciate your time.
L: Thank you for having me. Always a pleasure to discuss important subjects like housing.
E: And thank you to our audience for joining us in this discussion. Until next time, stay informed and engaged!