The Barça president offered a vigorous defence of the Espai Barça project, pushing back against reports from Prensa Ibérica’s El Periódico de Catalunya that highlighted irregularities connected with Camp Nou. In a detailed interview on Rac1, the club leader framed the ongoing coverage as part of a broader attack on the club, insisting that the criticisms amount to nothing more than a political and media campaign that seeks to undermine a project he calls central to the club’s future. He described the matter as a series of isolated incidents blown out of proportion by the press, arguing that inspections had found only a handful of minor events in the context of a massive, long-running undertaking.
During the exchange, the Barça president confronted not only the newspaper but the broader editorial group behind it, noting that the five labor inspections conducted had yielded two minor incidents that did not reflect the overall quality or compliance of the work. He asserted that the report’s sensationalized framing clashed with the actual facts of the project, stressing that Barça adheres to the applicable regulations and that the supposed crises were overemphasized. The tone of the interview reflected his view that the public narrative around the project was skewed, and that the team had faced a deliberate attempt to frame the work in a negative light. He described the situation as odd and unconvincing, pointing to the disparity between the splash of headlines and the measured reality on the ground.
According to him, the editorial stance appeared to rest on an ideological bias from above, with commentators crafting excuses to derail a project he regards as essential for the club, the city, and the country. He mentioned a leadership strain tied to political factors rather than sports reporting, suggesting a calculated effort to undermine Espai Barça from its inception. The president argued that such criticism was not neutral journalism but a targeted campaign aimed at destabilizing this milestone project in the club’s history, portraying the media scrutiny as a coordinated form of persecution that stretched beyond sports into broader civic concerns.
In the same line of defense, Laporta addressed the choice to bring in Limak as the contractor for the stadium reform. He explained that the decision rested on a careful comparison of capabilities and terms, noting that prominent financial institutions had been consulted and that the conditions were designed to be stringent. He claimed that Spanish firms were offered the same considerations but chose not to accept them, suggesting that the outcome was driven by economic and strategic calculations rather than favoritism. He added a pointed remark about media alignment, stating that if El Periódico currently leans toward Espai Barça, that stance is objectionable in his view and unjustified for a public institution of the club’s scale.
Several workers who spoke with the publication described shifts and supervisory changes following concerns raised by staff, with some reporting tighter oversight and others feeling a shift toward greater leniency. The president noted these testimonies as part of the broader narrative but cautioned against letting them redefine the project’s legitimacy, arguing that they reflect normal adjustments in a large construction effort rather than systemic abuse. He asserted that the overall program remained on track and that any legitimate issues were being addressed through formal channels rather than through sensational headlines. This perspective framed the media discourse as an incomplete picture, stressing the importance of evaluating the project against its documented progress and compliance records.
On regulatory scrutiny, the Generalitat’s Labor Inspectorate reportedly identified irregularities or fraud among approximately twenty of the forty-five subcontractors involved in Camp Nou’s redevelopment. The president highlighted these findings as confirmation of improper practices uncovered in November and emphasized that the audit requires back payments to workers and settlements with Social Security. He stressed that the existence of such violations underscores the necessity of rigorous oversight and accountability within a complex, multi-vendor construction effort. The broader message was clear: while the project faced criticisms from some corners, the enforcement actions and corrective steps illustrated a commitment to integrity and proper labor standards throughout the process.