PARIS: The thieves who stole crown jewels from the Louvre in October evaded police with just 30 seconds to spare due to avoidable security failures at the Paris museum, a damning investigation revealed on Wednesday.
The probe, ordered by the culture ministry after the embarrassing daylight heist, revealed that only one of two security cameras was working near the site where the intruders broke in on the morning of Sunday October 19.
Agents in the security control room did not have enough screens to follow the images in real-time, while a lack of coordination meant police were initially sent to the wrong place once the alarm was raised, the report unveiled at the French Senate’s Culture Commission stated.
“It highlights an overall failure of the museum, as well as its supervisory authority, to address security issues,” the head of the commission, Laurent Lafon, said at the start of a hearing.
One of the most startling revelations was that the robbers left only 30 seconds before police and private security guards arrived on the scene.
“Give or take 30 seconds, the Securitas (private security) guards or the police officers in a car could have prevented the thieves from escaping,” the head of the investigation, Noel Corbin, told senators.
He said that measures such as a modern CCTV system, more resistant glass in the door cut open with angle grinders, or better internal coordination could have prevented the loss of the jewels — worth an estimated $102 million — which have still not been found.
Major security vulnerabilities were highlighted in several studies seen by management of the Louvre over the last decade, including a 2019 audit by experts at the jewelry company Van Cleef & Arpels.
Their findings stressed that the riverside balcony targeted by the thieves was a weak point and could be easily reached with an extendable ladder — exactly what transpired in the heist.
‘Stunned’
Corbin confirmed that under-fire Louvre boss Laurence des Cars had not been aware of the audit which was ordered by her predecessor, Jean-Luc Martinez.
“The recommendations were not acted on and they would have enabled us to avoid this robbery,” Corbin said, adding that there had been a lack of coordination between the two government-appointed administrators.
Police believe they have arrested all four intruders, who escaped on powerful motorbikes, having carried out the heist in the Apollo Gallery in around 10 minutes in total, according to the investigation.
The revelations on Wednesday are likely to pile more pressure des Cars, the first woman in the role who was appointed by President Emmanuel Macron in 2021.
Questions have swirled since the break-in over whether it was avoidable and why a national treasure that is the world’s most-visited museum appeared to be so poorly protected.
France’s lower house of parliament is carrying out its own inquiry, while des Cars and Martinez are set to be grilled by senators next week.
Last month, France’s state auditor said security upgrades had been carried out at a “woefully inadequate pace” and the museum had prioritized “high-profile and attractive operations” instead of protecting itself.
Senior police officer Guy Tubiana, a security adviser at the culture ministry who took part in the investigation, told senators he was “stunned” by what he had discovered at the museum.
“There was a succession of malfunctions that led to catastrophe but I never would have thought the Louvre could have so many malfunctions,” he said.
Staff at the Louvre at set to go on strike on Monday to demand management act against what they see as understaffing and overcrowding at the museum, which welcomed 8.7 million people last year.
At the weekend, the museum revealed that a water leak had damaged 300 to 400 journals, books and documents in the Egyptian department in late November.
Louvre thieves escaped with 30 seconds to spare, probe reveals
https://arab.news/yyba3
Louvre thieves escaped with 30 seconds to spare, probe reveals
- Probe found only one of two security cameras was working near the site where the intruders broke in on the morning of Sunday October 19
Obamacare health subsidy to end as US Senate rejects dueling remedies
- Senate rejects Republican and Democratic health care proposals
- Democratic plan sought subsidy extension; Republicans offered to boost health savings accounts
WASHINGTON: The US Senate on Thursday rejected competing proposals by Republicans and Democrats to address a looming health care crisis, leaving some 24 million Americans vulnerable to significantly higher insurance premiums beginning on January 1 when a federal subsidy expires.
Barring any late breakthroughs, Congress will begin an end-of-year holiday recess sometime next week and not return until January 5, after new premiums are locked in for those who had relied on the Affordable Care Act enhanced subsidy.
In back-to-back votes largely along party lines, Democrats and Republicans blocked each other’s bill.
The House of Representatives might attempt to pass some sort of legislation next week, which has not yet been unveiled. Even if it were to pass, Senate Democrats, and possibly some Republicans, would oppose it and they could use their votes to kill that effort.
“After today’s vote, the American health care crisis is 100 percent on their shoulders,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said of Republicans.
Senate Republican leader John Thune dismissed the Democratic bill as “a political messaging exercise” and said “Republicans are ready to get to work. I’m not sure yet that Democrats are interested.”
The bitter battle in Congress has left some Americans uncertain over renewing their health insurance under the federal health care program.
The percentage of returning customers in the Obamacare exchanges is slightly down from a year ago, with the government reporting 19.9 percent of people enrolled this year opting to renew their plans so far, down from 20.5 percent this time last year.
The Republican bill by US Senators Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Mike Crapo of Idaho would have sent up to $1,500 to individuals earning less than 700 percent of the federal poverty level — about $110,000 for an individual or $225,000 for a family of four in 2025. Those funds could not be used for abortion or gender transition procedures and would require verification of beneficiaries’ immigration or citizenship status — provisions Democrats reject.
The Democratic proposal on the subsidies under the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare, would have extended COVID-era subsidies for three years to keep insurance premiums from soaring for many. Without action by Congress, those premiums could more than double in cost on average, according to KFF, a health policy organization.
Sixty votes were needed to pass either measure in a Senate that Republicans control 53-47. Four Republicans voted for the Democratic proposal. No Democrats backed the Republicans’ bill.
President Donald Trump has largely sat out the brawl over health care, although he ultimately embraced the Cassidy-Crapo approach.
At Thursday’s bipartisan Congressional Ball, Trump predicted Republicans and Democrats would work together on health care. But he advocated for the Republican bill.
“We have an idea that rather than making these massive payments... insurance companies, we make beautiful big payments directly to the people, and they buy their own,” Trump said in remarks at the black-tie event at the White House.
The $1,500 payments in the Republican bill were meant to cover some of the out-of-pocket costs that people in the “Bronze” or “Catastrophic” categories — the lower-cost Obamacare plans — need to pay before their insurance kicks in.
However, it is far below the plans’ deductibles, meaning that even after that payment, a patient would be on the hook for up to $7,500 in out-of-pocket medical expenses before their insurance would start to pay for part of their care.
Those costs can rack up quickly for people with lower-cost plans, with a visit to a US emergency room costing between $1,000 and $3,000, while an ambulance ride can cost anywhere from $500 to over $3,500.
With 2026 congressional elections coming into focus, many Republicans are nervous about the prospect of stiff premium increases hitting every state, including many that backed Trump’s 2024 re-election. Polling indicates voters could mostly punish Republicans, who control Congress and the White House.
Republican US Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri, a state that Trump carried by 18 points in his 2024 re-election, said his constituents have been telling him, “We can’t afford our premiums now, let alone if they would go up by 50 or 100 percent.”
Insurance companies warned customers of the rising premiums in the new year, and Democrats argued there was not enough time to do anything but a clean extension of the tax credits they sought.
A new Reuters/Ipsos poll found Americans back a health care subsidy continuation. Some 51 percent of respondents — including three-quarters of Democrats and a third of Republicans — said they support extending the subsidies. Only 21 percent said they were opposed.
Moderate Republican Representative Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania is spearheading a bipartisan bill to extend the subsidy through 2027. He is hoping to garner enough support to circumvent leadership and force votes on the measure by the full House.
