As Caritas grapples with the fallout of its financial scandal, Nathalie Frisch, a board member, has criticised the banks for their role in the scandal, accusing them of obstructing efforts to save the charity.
In a recent interview with our colleagues from RTL Télé, Nathalie Frisch, a member of the Caritas administrative board and crisis committee, attributed much of the blame for the charity's ongoing financial scandal to the involved banks.
Frisch explained that Caritas had safeguards in place for financial transactions, requiring double signatures for bank transfers. "It's not as if we were operating without any security precautions," she stated.
When asked if Caritas could have been saved, Frisch suggested that many parties, especially the banks, could have acted differently. She pointed out that loans were granted with only a single signature from management, bypassing the required approval from the administrative board.
On the question of whether the banks bear responsibility, Frisch's response was an unequivocal "yes." She explained that banks made it difficult for the state to provide financial aid to Caritas, as they intended to claim those funds for themselves. She added that banks exerted pressure despite disputes over their claims. According to Frisch, this likely complicated the state's efforts to assist Caritas, as any direct financial support would have been targeted by the banks.
Frisch also commented on the limited public discussion of the banks' role, attributing the silence to their economic influence.
Addressing suggestions that Caritas could have sold properties to raise funds, Frisch noted that many of these assets were bequeathed to the organisation and are subject to usage restrictions, making liquidation more complex than it appears.
The Caritas administrative board is currently still overseeing 40 to 50 staff members, including those involved in international cooperation, employees on fixed-term contracts, and others on sick leave.
"We are doing everything within our capacity to avoid layoffs, which is why we have not begun preparing a redundancy plan. We remain optimistic that there will be opportunities to offer everyone positions suited to their expertise," Frisch stated.
She expects that such offers could be made as early as next week.
Addressing reports of poor communication between the crisis committee and staff, Frisch firmly denied the claims. She emphasised that regular meetings were held with the staff delegation, and updates were provided to the Independent Luxembourg Trade Union Confederation (OGBL). Frisch expressed surprise at accusations of inadequate communication or pressure on employees, citing the handling of new employment contracts as an example. She explained that employees were informed contracts could only be signed once new agreements with the state were in place.
Frisch also disclosed that Caritas staff were assured they would retain the same contractual terms at the new organisation, Help on the Ground (HUT). Any contract discrepancies would be corrected, she said, adding that both the staff delegation and the OGBL were invited to be present during contract signings. However, Frisch claimed that the staff delegation applied pressure on employees not to sign.
On the subject of the diocese's involvement, Frisch clarified that the Church was kept informed throughout the Caritas affair. She noted that a diocesan representative initially engaged in daily discussions with the administrative board, though no formal audience with Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich was requested.
Frisch concluded by stating that while the Church could have potentially saved Caritas by founding a second organisation, it either chose not to or was unable to do so.
