The Infiltrators
How Consulting Firms Took Control of the State
By Louis Perez y Cid
We are in election season: the municipal elections.
Even though this election is, by nature, local, I can't help but think of a book that made a strong impression on me when it was published in 2022: The Infiltrators, by Matthieu Aron and Caroline Michel-Aguirre, published by Allary Éditions.
This book raises a troubling question: what becomes of a state when its strategic decisions are increasingly entrusted to external actors?
And, by extension, what becomes of our elections if those we choose sometimes merely rubber-stamp policies already conceived elsewhere?
Reading this book also reminded me of a classic of political thought, The Old Regime and the Revolution, published in 1856 by Alexis de Tocqueville. Nearly two centuries later, some of Tocqueville's insights seem to resonate with a strange relevance today.
The State and its Dependence on Consultants
In *The Infiltrators*, the authors describe a phenomenon that has gradually taken root at the heart of the state apparatus: the growing influence of private consulting firms.
For the past twenty years or so, these firms, often international and largely Anglo-Saxon, have been involved in increasingly sensitive areas: modernization of public administration, digital transformation, hospital organization, industrial strategy, and public policy reforms.
The issue took on a particular dimension during the Covid-19 pandemic. In 2021, it was revealed that several firms, including McKinsey & Company, had been mobilized by the French government to support certain logistical and organizational operations, particularly those related to the vaccination campaign.
This information sparked a lively debate: how could a country with a powerful administration, prestigious training institutions, and one of the highest levels of public spending in the world have come to rely so heavily on external contractors to manage such sensitive missions?
The authors point out that this dependence did not begin with the health crisis. It developed gradually, through administrative reforms and state modernization policies.
For the past twenty years or so, these firms, often international and largely Anglo-Saxon, have been involved in increasingly sensitive areas: modernization of public administration, digital transformation, hospital organization, industrial strategy, and public policy reforms.
The issue took on a particular dimension during the Covid-19 pandemic. In 2021, it was revealed that several firms, including McKinsey & Company, had been mobilized by the French government to support certain logistical and organizational operations, particularly those related to the vaccination campaign.
This information sparked a lively debate: how could a country with a powerful administration, prestigious training institutions, and one of the highest levels of public spending in the world have come to rely so heavily on external contractors to manage such sensitive missions?
The authors point out that this dependence did not begin with the health crisis. It developed gradually, through administrative reforms and state modernization policies.
Expectations that are difficult to measure
One of the problems raised by the investigation lies in the difficulty of accurately assessing the true cost of using consultants. Government agencies rarely disclose these expenses. Journalists had to turn to data published by the Public Procurement Economic Observatory, which tracks purchases made by the government and its agencies.
These figures show a significant increase in overall spending on external services between the mid-2000s and the late 2010s. However, these amounts include numerous categories (IT, maintenance, logistics, security, etc.), making it difficult to precisely isolate consulting contracts alone.
In any case, the general impression remains: the French state has gradually developed a form of dependence on private expertise.
A dependence that is not only measured in money, but also in influence.
Because when a strategy is conceived outside the administration, the question inevitably arises: who really decides?
These figures show a significant increase in overall spending on external services between the mid-2000s and the late 2010s. However, these amounts include numerous categories (IT, maintenance, logistics, security, etc.), making it difficult to precisely isolate consulting contracts alone.
In any case, the general impression remains: the French state has gradually developed a form of dependence on private expertise.
A dependence that is not only measured in money, but also in influence.
Because when a strategy is conceived outside the administration, the question inevitably arises: who really decides?
Consent rather than conspiracy
The authors of *The Infiltrators* do not speak of a conspiracy.
They describe instead a phenomenon of accumulation: ad hoc decisions, political emergencies, administrative reforms, and the pursuit of immediate efficiency.
Little by little, whether out of convenience or necessity, the state has outsourced an increasing share of its strategic thinking capabilities.
In other words, it was not a brutal power grab, but a gradual shift in the centers of expertise.
Tocqueville's Perspective
This evolution reminded me of Tocqueville's analysis in *The Old Regime and the Revolution*.
According to him, the French Revolution was not only a rupture. It was also the consequence of trends already present under the monarchy.
He identifies three key features:
• a highly centralized administration, already very powerful before 1789,
• a society riddled with privileges that fueled tensions,
• a nobility that had lost its political role, retaining advantages but without any real responsibility in governing the country.
Tocqueville also makes a famous observation: "Inequalities often become most unbearable at the very moment they begin to diminish."
They describe instead a phenomenon of accumulation: ad hoc decisions, political emergencies, administrative reforms, and the pursuit of immediate efficiency.
Little by little, whether out of convenience or necessity, the state has outsourced an increasing share of its strategic thinking capabilities.
In other words, it was not a brutal power grab, but a gradual shift in the centers of expertise.
Tocqueville's Perspective
This evolution reminded me of Tocqueville's analysis in *The Old Regime and the Revolution*.
According to him, the French Revolution was not only a rupture. It was also the consequence of trends already present under the monarchy.
He identifies three key features:
• a highly centralized administration, already very powerful before 1789,
• a society riddled with privileges that fueled tensions,
• a nobility that had lost its political role, retaining advantages but without any real responsibility in governing the country.
Tocqueville also makes a famous observation: "Inequalities often become most unbearable at the very moment they begin to diminish."
A Question for Our Time
When we observe contemporary France, certain questions arise.
• Our state remains extremely centralized.
• Distrust of political elites continues to grow.
• And the impression that decisions are being made increasingly remotely from the citizen is fueling a democratic malaise.
As upcoming political deadlines approach, many are promising to reduce inequality. Let's just hope that this promise will act as a calming influence… and not as a trigger.
A country doesn't lose its sovereignty overnight: it outsources it.
• Our state remains extremely centralized.
• Distrust of political elites continues to grow.
• And the impression that decisions are being made increasingly remotely from the citizen is fueling a democratic malaise.
As upcoming political deadlines approach, many are promising to reduce inequality. Let's just hope that this promise will act as a calming influence… and not as a trigger.
A country doesn't lose its sovereignty overnight: it outsources it.