ZCZC
BCN-07
EU-TRANSPORT-MERGER-SIEMENS
Is EU competition law outdated in the age of China?
BRUSSELS, Jan 18, 2019 (BSS/AFP) – Are European competition rules obsolete
in the face of the Chinese threat?
This is the debate in Brussels as the powerful European commission seems
set to veto a blockbuster merger of the train-making businesses of Siemens
and Alstom.
The tie-up, announced in 2017, was billed as the birth of an all-too-rare
European industrial champion — a “Railbus” to match Airbus, Europe’s
aviation giant that competes toe-to-toe with US-rival Boeing.
“Do we want… the single market to become a supermarket for all the major
powers, China and the United States,” thundered Bruno Le Maire on Monday.
“Or do we want Europe to be powerful and sovereign?” demanded the French
finance minister, who has led an impassioned campaign to defend the tie-up.
A view echoed in Berlin, which has also lobbied — if less ardently — for
the deal.
“We need more European champions to stand up to Chinese and American
competition,” Peter Altmaier, Le Maire’s counterpart, told the German daily
Handelsblatt on Friday.
But the road to building a juggernaut is blocked by a formidable obstacle:
EU competition law and Margrethe Vestager, the steely European commissioner
whose job is to enforce it.
Since 2014, Vestager has grabbed headlines, facing down the world’s most
powerful companies, including iPhone maker Apple, which she ordered to pay 14
billion euros ($15.9 billion) in back taxes to Ireland.
A former Danish minister, Vestager has been celebrated as a hero for
thwarting Silicon Valley, but the unexpected turn of the screws on big plans
for Europe has come as a shock in Paris and Berlin.
In a 25-page manifesto published last week, the powerful German Industry
Federation (BDI) demanded a rethink of European competition law in order to
get tough on the Chinese superpower where multinationals are deeply enmeshed
with Communist party power.
MORE/HR/0932
ZCZC
BCN-08
EU-TRANSPORT-MERGER-SIEMENS 2 BRUSSELS
“While in China, large groups are created through state intervention, EU
competition authorities only look at the European internal market as a
relevant market for European mergers,” it wrote.
Underlined, in tacit reference to the near-doomed merger, was “the example
of the Chinese railway giant CRRC, born from the merger of two state-owned
companies”.
Vestager does not dispute the need to create European champions, just not
in defiance of established rules.
In a highly exceptional move, the issue was discussed earlier this week by
the EU’s 28 commissioners, whose role in antitrust cases is to rubber-stamp
what has been decided by Vestager and her teams.
Vestager did not deny to her counterparts the need to “face the clear
risks of Chinese competition,” according to her preparatory note for the
meeting, a copy of which was obtained by AFP.
But she also defended existing competition law that “encourages good
European champions”.
“To be competitive abroad requires competition at home,” she said.
According to French Commissioner Pierre Moscovici, the discussion was
“frank and open”, a diplomatic euphemism for a row.
“We are not naive,” the former French finance minister said after the
meeting.
“The Commission’s thinking as a whole is not obsolete, we want to take
into account the evolution of tomorrow’s economy,” he said.
Last year the Europeans agreed on a framework for tracking foreign
investment in the EU, to address the concerns of the largest member states
about acquisitions, mainly Chinese, in strategic sectors.
Nevertheless, there are two opposing visions of competition law in Europe.
MORE/HR/0934
ZCZC
BCN-09
EU-TRANSPORT-MERGER-SIEMENS 3 LAST BRUSSELS
– Defending ‘Made in Europe’ –
The first, of liberal-free market inspiration, wants strict enforcement of
the rules regardless of political or strategic considerations.
Breaking the rules “would weaken our credibility without solving the
underlying challenges”, said an editorial in the Financial Times, praising
the Danish Commissioner’s intransigence.
Another camp would like more flexibility in the rules to preserve and
promote the “made in Europe”, as argued in an editorial in last Monday’s Le
Monde newspaper titled: “Save the European factory”.
According to a merger lawyer in Brussels, who asked to remain anonymous,
“European rules are not as restrictive as that, but some lawyers in the
commission are very young and tend to be extremely zealous in handling cases
to cover themselves”.
The Commission, on the other hand, warns against too much flexibility.
“Our aim is to protect fair competition in the EU. Not doing so could also
turn against Europeans,” a senior official recently noted, pointing out that
Brussels was also responsible for controlling the effects of US mergers on
European soil.
The prohibition of a merger by Brussels is extremely rare: in ten years,
it has blocked seven mergers and authorised more than 3,000.
BSS/AFP/HR/0935