-
- Freight elevator used in the Louvre heist
Screenshot from TF1’s 8 p.m. news broadcast - See the image in its page
“I made security an absolute priority”. We have already had occasion to write this several times: this sentence by Laurence des Cars, spoken before the Senate and since repeated on many occasions, is a lie. Neither her interviews given to the press before the theft, nor the activity reports of recent years, bore any sign of genuine concern for this matter (see this article, and this one), and that is easily verifiable. We also know that her interventions at Board of Directors did not address it either.
A report by the Court of Auditors also pointed this out (see this article), as did the inspection of the Ministry of Culture, unpublished, but whose conclusions are equally clear. And it is an internal document, produced by the management of the Louvre, that finally convinces those who might still doubt: the « project of the performance contract 2025–2029 of the Établissement public du musée du Louvre », dated September 2025, which was to be presented to the Governing Board scheduled for 27 November 2025. It even reads on page 3 that: « The COP 2025–2029 was approved at the Governing Board’ meeting of 27 November 2025 » and this 76‑page document (87 with appendices) ends with space for the signatures of the president of the Louvre and the Minister of Culture. The Board was finally postponed to early 2026, and it is likely that this contract will be substantially revised by then…
The previous Performance Contract, covering the period 2020–2024, already did not make security its priority. It included four axes, the third entitled « Maintaining the Louvre estate, enhancing it and securing it », followed by three « indicators », including the « Implementation of the Master Plan for Security Equipment » [1].
This implementation, up to 2024, was very insufficient, as the Court of Auditors notes: little or nothing was “implemented” up to 2024, nor even in 2025, since the works, which were to begin in 2024, were not scheduled to start before 2026. The budget was therefore, over five years, only €4.87 million in payment authorisations. A derisory figure compared with the €80 million that bringing it up to standard would cost, according to the Louvre. This delay would be explained « by the scale and complexity [of the] project », and « by budgetary constraints which, in 2023, forced the EPML to revise the overall timetable of the project ». Budgetary constraints which we know do not exist, except to favour the Louvre Nouvelle Renaissance project, abundantly cited in this document, and which Emmanuel Macron and Laurence des Cars have just said remains current.
Before addressing the indicators to be followed for the COP 2025–2029, the document takes stock of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. And again, the absence of consideration for security issues is glaring. These are not listed as a weakness of the Louvre. On the contrary, among its strengths, under the chapter of its « responsible management », is cited a « detailed and monitored risk map ». This risk map is cited by the Cour des comptes report which notes that « of the 58 risks identified, only three were considered critical, and all relate to IT security ». Theft, supposing it had been identified as a risk, was therefore not considered critical. Nor is it a threat to the Louvre. Far more serious, therefore, appears for it — we quote some of the threats listed — the « growing societal challenges addressed to museums » (sic) or the « competition for private fundraising ». In this section devoted to « threats », the « growing challenges regarding safety and security » envisage neither theft nor even fire, but do not forget to worry about « ticketing fraud » and the « volatility of tourist and school attendance » [2].
And this absence of concern for the theft of works is found again in the indicators retained for the COP 2025–2029, which focuses above all on the great presidential project « Louvre Nouvelle Renaissance », which becomes the alpha and omega of all its policy.
Of 21 « indicators », only one addresses this question, indicator number 16 entitled: « Master Plan for Security Equipment ». It therefore concerns the implementation of the master plan that we have seen was postponed for reasons of « complexity » and « budget ». And if this document covers the period 2025–2029, that master plan will be far from complete since we read that « the year 2025 is devoted to the call for tenders for the works which will begin mid‑2026 and will be staggered in phases throughout the period of the present COP and the next COP ». That is to say a completion expected, at best, in 2033!
This subject, manifestly not a priority, nevertheless seems to be more advanced than that of fire: no indicator is retained for the implementation of the fire master plan, which the Court of Auditors had noted (and which is also visible in this document) was not finalised.
The conclusion is simple: this draft COP 2025–2029, developed under the direction of Laurence des Cars and which she was to sign, proves, once again, that the security of works, notably protection against theft, was in no way a priority for her, contrary to what she affirmed before the Senate. As Vincent Noce points out in an article published] [3] at our colleagues of Le Quotidien de l’Art about this same document, the word “theft” does not even appear in it.