“Faced with the evident current difficulties of large European industry in the context of global competition, I wonder if and to what extent the European rules on competition established twenty years ago are still valid. Or whether, in a radically changed world economic scenario, these have not ended up penalizing the competitiveness of the large European industrial groups today. And if, therefore, the time has not come to modify them to re-establish equal conditions on international markets between EU companies and those of the major competitor countries".
In this interview with FIRSTonline, Amalia Sartori, president of the Industry commission of the European Parliament – in Rome for a seminar of the European Commission and Parliament (with the journalism school of Perugia) on the needs and prospects for economic growth of the EU – speaks with great frankness critical of the European competition rules. A crucial issue for the future of Europe at a time when the strategy of financial rigor is forced to deal with the need for economic development in the absence of which recovery risks appearing ever more distant.
FIRSTonline - President, in this attempt to square the circle to reconcile financial recovery and the "restart" of the economy, what induces you to place the emphasis on the rules of competition, which until now have been considered to have helped a balanced growth of the fabric European industrialist?
Sartori – Twenty years ago, while the European single market was being born, these rules were indispensable to prevent some large companies in Europe from growing enormously until they assumed a monopolistic role that would have crushed all forms of competition (i.e. the key to the free market) in this or that sector of the industry. And they have guaranteed the function for which they were introduced for years. Consider for example, in the steel industry, the case of the Terni steelworks which was compulsorily sold because the owner at the time, a Finnish group, had exceeded a maximum limit in the sector market. Just one example that demonstrates how those rules have been useful for years.
FIRSTonline – And then what changed?
Sartori – The world scenario. Until the early XNUMXs, world competition was played out between the United States, Europe, Japan and, within certain limits, Russia. Today, in a context of economic globalization, the EU is also forced to deal with strong new 'competitors', such as China, India, South Africa, Brazil and Russia itself. Countries where the major industrial groups have reached production and commercial dimensions inaccessible to European ones precisely because of our rules on competition.
FIRSTonline – Basically, you argue that those rules penalize the large European industrial groups, and therefore they must be changed…
Sartori – I say that on this issue it is necessary for everyone to start a very in-depth reflection. An afterthought prompted by the numbers that bear witness to the drastic drop in the contribution of industry to the formation of the EU gross domestic product, which fell from 22% eight years ago to 18% today. In short, it is necessary to stop the process of deindustrialization in progress.
FIRSTonline – But how can this process be stopped?
Tailors – The issue is under the attention of all three European institutions. Parliament, with a resolution approved in plenary in Strasbourg, set a target of 20% by 2020. We are all convinced that it would be folly to give up having a strong industrial fabric in Europe. Also because a further retreat of the giants would also have devastating consequences on small and medium-sized enterprises, which would risk a drastic cut in orders and therefore their very survival.
FIRSTonline – In your opinion, is it enough to simply reform the rules of competition to make the level of industrialization grow again in Europe?
Sartori - Of course not. Above all, an industrial policy is needed to stimulate investments that look to the future. First of all in the technological and “green” industries. In this regard, I am thinking of the electric car especially in the field of small and medium-sized engines, an approach that would benefit Italy as well as France. I am thinking of the development of energy efficiency, a road already taken by the EU, starting from public real estate assets. And also to research, innovation, telecommunications.
FIRSTonline – What path can you imagine on the reform of competition law? And in what times?
Sartori – A path that is neither easy nor short. Changing the existing rules would not solve everything. Apart from the inevitable differences between the 27 member countries, it cannot be overlooked that the economy today is global. Even with a general agreement internally, the European Union could not impose its rules outside its borders. However, it could refuse the importation of products from third countries that do not meet the quality requirements required for European ones. But it is a road - I repeat - not easy. And, as for the times, they won't be quick: today we are in a phase in which the idea is accepted that the question needs to be studied in depth, and a minimum of agreement can be glimpsed on the way to operate in order to move forward. For now we have to settle for this.
FIRSTonline – Still on the subject of competition, President, do you share the reservations expressed by various parties regarding the trade agreement between Italy and Korea?
Sartori – It will be possible to evaluate it more fully in the near future. However, of course, it seems to me that it penalizes Europe; and in particular Italy and France, i.e. the two countries producing medium-small cars that will suffer the most from the competition from Korean cars. The issue is that in a trade agreement between two countries the financial aspect must certainly be evaluated (which in the case of the one with Korea seems positive for Italy). But the productive and employment ones cannot be neglected.
FIRSTonline – Do you mean that in these respects Italy has not done a good deal?
Tailors – We will see what effects it will have on the consistency of jobs in the auto sector. But I strongly hope that in any case the agreement being prepared with Japan is not a photocopy of the one with Korea.
