Graduating at the top of his class from ENA, Yves Sabouret, after studies in literature, law and economics, was for 15 years in the service of the State before taking his career to the private sector for the next 30 years. Former social affairs advisor to Prime Minister Pierre Mesmer (Pompidou administration), he organized the Secretariat of State on Women’s Issues under Valery Giscard d’Estaing before joining Jean-Luc Lagardère and today presiding over the Fondation de France.

How would you define your organization, the Fondation de France?

For 40 years, the Fondation de France has remained faithful to its credo: help those who help instead of doing it yourself. We work hand in hand with players in the field. We work hard to collect funds and allocate them as rigorously and transparently as possible.  We act as a coach for associations or foundations that need a structure that will provide accounting, financial and legal services. We are a foundation that offers shelter. It’s our way of being useful. There is a moderate, limited militancy. It is exhilarating. In a society that is more and more scattered, with a breakdown of ideologies and a weakening of all the intermediary bodies, players are refocusing on individual action: being useful where they are. This takes place in the neighborhood association or the sports organization. The fact remains that it’s sometimes just as depressing to be a mere drop of water in an ocean of precariousness…

How did you come to be the president of the Fondation de France?

I left the administration in 1975. I worked with Jean-Luc Lagardère until he died. He had made me responsible for the social issues and affairs.  When Jean-Luc Lagardère died in 2003, I was 66 years old. I thought I could divide the last part of my active life between an economic position and volunteer work.  A friend of mine, one of the few women on the board of the Fondation de France, was coming to the end of her term. She proposed me to her president. I joined the board around 2002-2003. Then I was nominated for the vice-presidency. Bertrand Dufourcq, who in turn was coming to the end of his term, then proposed to the board that I be his successor. A foundation is the opposite of politics. You’re allowed one term of 4 years, renewable only once. It’s a way of guaranteeing independence in our rulings and ensuring the acquisition of fresh blood.

What would you say have been the most important encounters or events in your career?

I’d say Jacques Delors and Father Wressinski. It was 1972-1973. I was social affairs advisor to the Prime Minister. The founder of ATD Fourth World brought me to Cité des 4000. We discovered poverty in France. Immigration wasn’t much of an issue, with the exception of the immigration due to the war in Algeria. I had done my 30 months of military service there. For the young middle-class man that I was, it was a major eye opener.

How would you define the term ’social’?

The social is others. This is measured in terms of degree of motivation and willingness to get involved: from those close to us, a circle that expands concentrically toward people different from yourself who need you.

In thirty years, what have you observed in matters of social change?

Information made it possible to address quite a few topics: incest, violence against women, child abuse, health problems, etc.  We talk more easily.  It’s this new vision of society that at the same time gave rise to new forms of solidarity which developed through the foundations.  Acts of solidarity have greatly amplified. And because they have amplified, philanthropic activity has developed. There is a gradual lifting of the taboo around money. A less prudish way of talking about standards of living and needs. For a foundation, this allows handling of money more freely and more transparently. The family unit exploded, just as had the local and natural solidarities. Since then, the new generations are under more stress, and are more motivated and materialistic. Longer life expectancy has given rise to new poverty among the elderly. There is also the precariousness of the single-parent families. Once a month, I try to visit the field in the provinces. Who do we find in integration organizations? Women. In the northern neighborhoods of Marseille, in Metz or Nancy, in these huge housing complexes built in the 60s, it’s all about women. They’re the ones with the stability, responsibility and action. They’re the ones who create community organizations. Another factor enters into consideration: the appearance of the secular society in the 19th century. Our ancestors lived in societies that were dominated by religion. Money was taboo. Wealth was a sin. The secular societies have taken up the same values without the God factor. This has persisted. Remember the words of Mitterrand on the evils of money. They could have been uttered by any religious leader. It was the Catholic tradition to hold money as suspect — except when it was to be given to the Church!  The Protestants are the opposite. According to them, economic success is legitimate in human progress. But there is a duty to give back part of it. This explains the appearance of foundations in the Anglo-Saxon world. I remain convinced that the origin of this movement is religious. It’s the accomplishment of a form of solidarity in a puritan tradition.

With a certain vanity, Abbé Pierre would say: “As long as there are people like me, there will be problems.”

Post war, the world that had been destroyed needed to be rebuilt. Housing, coal extraction, a period where the secondary economy prevailed over the others. Social democracy in Scandinavia was the clear and conscious extension of this system through a redistribution economy. I experienced this period with Jacques Delors. The data were simple. We lived with growth of 4 to 6%. Productivity increased by 1 to 2% a year. It we as a matter of redistributing surplus growth. Enrichment through salary increases and dividends was possible. And part was redistributed with major social contributions. When growth slowed down, the redistribution was carried out to the detriment of the primary players. This is how the real salaries went down in Germany, and hardly went up in France. The social contributions continued to increase to protect a social system that dated back to the post-war growth. Since then, every year, the deficits have increased without the employed benefiting from it. The protection system is not funded. It generates deficits that will increase future contributions.

In the same way as climate disturbances, do you think that an incomprehensible condition of poverty may be aggravated by natural disturbances in society?

In the past, accidents, the death of one out of two children, were more accepted. Life expectancy was 40 years, death was an integral part of life. Religion helped people handle adversity. The chances of survival having considerably increased, denial of fatality has created terrible frustration. Now, one gendarme dies and a minister is mobilized within 12 hours. There’s nothing he can do about it, but if he doesn’t do it, it means the government has no compassion. We look for causes for deaths that are very often the result of chance or accident. Someone must be to blame. It’s an extremely destructive attitude. For this reason, the States undertake prevention and protection actions that are so costly they penalize the economy.

What about the digital world?

I think it has two virtues: the mastering of a technology and access to the world. This is unprecedented in the history of humanity, and pulverizes the intermediary structures. There’s “me and the world” — even if in terms of democracy, this poses a real problem. This leads to democracy of opinion. And I still believe in representative democracy.

What do you think of the personal assistance robots which are so popular in Japan?

I’m a little old fashioned, I still think it’s all about personal contact. The intervention of machines is valuable. The Internet is a fabulous tool, but it is a link between human beings.

What is your view of the ‘creative capitalism’ promoted by entrepreneurs, generally Anglo-Saxon, like Bill Gates?

This is also called the new philanthropy or solidarity economy. These concepts pertain to the same concern, sometimes still a little vague. But the Fondation de France is thinking about it. Two ideas come to mind: the application of micro-credit to developed economies (the Fondation has helped a lot in the initial phases) and to these new purely philanthropic foundations which expect a cash return on the activity created. Croissance + accommodates young open-minded, reformist business owners, who have often achieved success in finance. I remember one convention where part of the audience had protested. They didn’t want to put money back at the heart of the matter.

What role does culture play in your life?

I’m a cultural magpie. Everything amuses me, interests me, I exclude nothing. I’m not saying that I love rock’n'roll. I wouldn’t say, either, that I found the nouveau roman entertaining. But I have other areas of interest. Among the arts that I never get tired of, there’s music, painting, architecture.

Interview by JC