Reciprocal approach? Mario Monti believes that France is now less distrustful and reticent about a liberal economy and free competition than previously. I have expressed the opinion that a substantial part of this shift was made by the EU itself: the European institutions and most of the “liberal” member states toned down their opposition to any kind of state intervention in the economy.
An occasion to discuss this matter was provided by the Round Table organised by the European Movement/France (MEF), in partnership with the Institute of Political Studies (Sciences Po) on the theme of France, the European Union and Competition Policy. MEF president, Sylvie Goulard, knew very well that her initiative was not going to lead to a legal or theoretical debate on the advantages or disadvantages of free competition but to a political confrontation and an examination of a number of fundamental orientations on essential subjects such as: the affirmation of the European identity in the context of globalisation; the role of the state in the economy; the position of services of general economic interest etc. Starting from very different national positions and traditions, can Europe be seen to be moving towards common or at least compatible positions? The Paris debate was followed the day after with a colloquy in Brussels on a similar theme (EUROPE 9539), which demonstrated that on the ground, divergences persist.
Satisfaction and caution. In Paris, the vocabulary of Mario Monti, the former European commissioner for competition, was cautious. He talked about “an impalpable revolution” and signs of small developments, and he pointed out that initially France considered the words economic liberalism as dangerous as their opposite, communism (we know that Mr Monti was requested by President Sarkozy to take part in the Attali Commission to establish a report on how to free-up France from some of the barriers obstructing economic growth). In his opinion the disciplines of an efficient competition policy on industry were overvalued whilst the advantages of this policy on the companies themselves (as well as for consumers and technological progress) were undervalued. The fight against cartels and the abuse of dominant positions protects small and medium-sized enterprises, and state aid is not banned but instead subject to certain conditions. Free competition is, together with trade and monetary policy, one of the areas where Europe is present and where it has won respect. In this sector, the EU is not only Europe, the area but also Europe, the power.
Conditions. None of the French speakers disputed the principles contained in the affirmations of Mr Monti, even though the range of participants was a broad one: Jean-Pierre Jouyet, the French minister of European affairs; Jean-Louis Bianco, the Socialist parliamentarian and spokesperson for Ségolène Royal in the presidential campaign; representatives from the business community and trade unions. Nonetheless, conditions were highlighted in which a convergence of ideas could be put into practice.
The Socialist, Jean-Louis Bianco, acknowledged that in his country a certain “mental confusion” had existed but which had now been overcome. Prejudice with regard to free competition had been superseded thanks to two conditions: abusive dominant positions must be assessed in relation to the world market not the European market; competition policy must be accompanied by other parallel policies: industrial policy, stimulation of research and innovation, and recognition of services of general economic interest. Jérôme Bedier, speaking on behalf of the employers (Medef) pointed out that “even Medef is evolving”. But competition has to take into account the particularities of sectors such as energy (competition is good but has to be accompanied by a strategy) and without forgetting that “sovereign funds” from some third countries can gobble up the European big-hitters. According to the national secretary of the CFDT union, Marcel Grignard, if competition rules are to be fair they must be respected at a global level; be balanced between social and fiscal policy; avoid competition between states (in conditions, for example, where companies choose to be based: why did the Franco-German giant EADS choose the Netherlands instead of France and Germany as the country where its central office is based?
Tomorrow I will look at two positions which are more political (Alain Lamassoure MEP and the minister, Jean-Pierre Jouyet). I will also be justifying my opinion on the double convergence of Paris to Brussels and Brussels to Paris, and looking at the significance of this. (F.R.)