Maria Elena Fort: "If anyone thinks that transparency means opening up completely, they are mistaken."

BarcelonaMaria Elena Fort (Barcelona, ​​1970) speaks as a member of Joan Laporta's candidacy for the presidency of Barça, but above all as the former institutional vice-president and former board member responsible for Espai Barça. The Barcelona lawyer, the only woman on the outgoing Barça board, speaks to ARA 10 days before the eagerly awaited re-election.

Why do you think Barça members should vote for Laporta?

— For the same reason as in 2021 and also in 2003. It guarantees the defense of the institution against everything and everyone. Difficult decisions have been made, but always with the good of the institution in mind. And this has yielded results. That's why we speak of experience, of courage.

You say you've saved Barça. How does this claim square with activating levers worth almost 900 million euros and accumulating more than 200 million in losses throughout your term?

— We haven't sold assets worth almost 900 million. The first thing we did was sell some audiovisual rights. And then A new business was created [Barça Vision]We haven't sold off the family jewels. When we walked in on the first day of the board meeting, they'd left us a folder on the table stating that the club's salvation lay in various business areas: the academies, the audiovisual business, and BLM. It was all worth 250 million. Now, all of this is worth much more.

And what about accumulated losses?

— Montjuïc has cost us 100 million euros per season. However, we've managed to turn a profit for two consecutive years. Barça was dead. When we took over, we couldn't even pay salaries or the electricity bill. The club would have had to be legally dissolved. Of course we saved Barça!

Have you ever considered stepping down due to the strain of your mandate?

— It's been five years, and there's obvious wear and tear. And there are days when you'd like to give it your all. But no. I feel very comfortable.

You were one of the most visible figures when the supporters' section was evicted from the stadium. Now there have been talks about them being allowed back in, but without you. How have you experienced this?

— Everything was normal. I acted as spokesperson and kept everyone informed about the situation. The process is flexible enough that other people can get involved at times. I'm glad things have been resolved. This board has always been in favor of having fans in the stadium.

It has been reported that the person who led these conversations was Alejandro Echevarría.

— I don't know, I haven't intervened.

What do you think of Echevarría's leading role in the management of Barça?

— Like everyone on this team, each of us has our roles and responsibilities. I believe that today Alejandro is an essential person for the functioning of the entire project.

Does he not care that he was a patron of the Francisco Franco Foundation in the past?

— I feel comfortable with people working. That's all.

Do you understand why some candidates accuse Laporta of mistreating club members?

— Absolutely not.

So why the emphasis on online assemblies?

— The two things have nothing to do with each other. Online assemblies They have greater participation than in-person meetings. The world is digital, and we must try to ensure everyone can connect. On the other hand, we also had to scale them back a bit because we didn't have all the club's facilities ready. The goal is to make them hybrid, so everyone can connect and any delegate who wants to attend can come.

If they are elected, will the next one be in person?

— If not the first, then the next.

Do you believe that the board you have been a part of for the past five years has been transparent?

— Absolutely. But, of course, if anyone thinks transparency means being completely transparent, they're very mistaken. Do you see all companies making all their figures available to all their partners? Do you think any candidate can say they'll knock on Nike's door and explain all their contracts? Or with Spotify? Either they're trying to deceive us or they're completely out of touch. We've been completely transparent. No board member of any club has had to explain how we've handled things.

Certain Barça Vision members and seat buyers VIP They weren't informed when they should have been. These aren't contractual details; it's about knowing who the club is partnering with.

— The world doesn't work that way. The necessary agreements were discussed in assembly and explained.

How do you assess the family management model that Laporta has once defended?

— Barça is an institution, not a business. And the president's point is that this can't be run with purely business criteria; you have to approach it as something you personally want. Things aren't done with spreadsheets or PowerPoint presentations. There are intangible elements involved. This isn't just about making money, but about managing an institution that is the highest representative of the country.

As head of the Ethics and Transparency Committee for this term, what is your opinion on one of Laporta's first decisions being change the code of ethics to relax the conditions for hiring family members at the club?

— What's the problem? If you have someone who works well and can contribute, they don't necessarily have to be excluded from having a family relationship.

What do you think about a company paying 350,000 euros into the directors' account to pay the 2021 guarantee, and then months later Barça hiring this supplier for the same price?

— This company already worked with Barça. They only made a loan that is still being repaid. There's nothing more to say.

Are you happy with the choice of Limak for the Camp Nou renovation?

— Yes a lot.

It was the construction company worst rated in one of the internal studies of the Espai Barça professionals.

— Interestingly, the report that came out [smiles]. The others didn't. When we took over, we thought it would be interesting to open the bidding process to international companies. Limak was a powerful construction firm. Goldman Sachs already knew them because they had worked together. There was a report from someone at the club saying they didn't have enough experience with stadiums. They had built a small one, but they had done much more complex infrastructure projects like Istanbul Airport. When we first identified deficiencies to correct in the old stadium, we estimated 300, but Limak did such a thorough job that they found ten times that number. This delayed the work by a few months. I'm very proud of the decision we made.

Other people from Espai Barça such as Jordi Llauradó or Ramón Ramírez left the project after this election.

— Things always get mixed up. Being at Barça brings a lot of responsibility, and everyone, at certain times, may agree or disagree with something. Their leaving doesn't mean there's anything strange going on. We're always trying to find conspiracy theories.

It's clear that there's still a lot of work to be done and that they've already exceeded 1 billion (of the 1.45 billion borrowed from Goldman Sachs). Do they plan to extend the loan to finish the stadium?

— When I left the club, it wasn't planned. But if we ever have to do it, nothing will happen. We'll follow the normal procedures, that's all, but it's not currently planned.

And the Palau? It is not explicitly mentioned in the loan agreement.

— The project will be underway soon, and the intention is to move forward with the available funds. If that fails, we will follow the appropriate legal procedures.

Are you comfortable with Congo sponsoring Barça?

— Many things in the world I live in make me feel uncomfortable. With Congo, the condition is that it's not just a sponsorship where we receive money, but that it also helps a country that is willing to leave. We work with Congolese refugees through UNHCR, and this sponsorship is tied to a whole project.

Let's talk about the Congo because you were there very belligerent towards Barça's alliance with Qatar.

— The environments and situations are very different. If you asked me now about a sponsorship with Qatar, I wouldn't see it the same way I did ten years ago. Things have changed a lot, and the countries themselves have changed as well.

How do you assess the online harassment suffered by those who criticize Laporta? Some journalists have had to leave their jobs because of it.

— I thought you'd ask me about the constant online harassment I endure [Laughs]. I think we've all become a bit foolish. Public shaming for expressing an opinion should never exist. I've suffered a significant one myself, with undertones of sexism and fatphobia. If anyone has been harassed for opposing the board, I'm deeply sorry.

At which board meeting was it approved that the Camp Nou box will no longer be called the Josep Suñol Presidential Exchange?

— That wasn't the case. First, the agreement with Spotify isn't included in the naming of the stadium's interior spaces. Second, the stadium is under construction, and currently, no element of the stadium bears a name. The Paris Room does, because we haven't touched it. As for the naming convention? If I may, strictly speaking, Suñol is spelled with a NY, not an Ñ. We want to list Suñol as the Barça president using his Catalan name. His family disagrees. I hope we can resolve this.

So, has the entire name been erased due to a spelling issue?

— Yes, at that time. And because we haven't yet named any of the parts of the stadium.

They promised a statutory reform that has not been carried out. Why?

— We conducted a participatory process and had a well-developed and refined proposal for 21st-century bylaws. But once that was done, we needed to let it settle. When we wanted to revisit the issue, there was only a year left before the elections, and we felt that a reform at that time wouldn't have been well-received.

What do you understand by 21st-century statutes?

— Update them. The electoral and participatory processes are not up to date.