Globalization\nis gaining momentum these days: the corona virus not only highlights the\nvulnerability of global supply chains, the crisis also shows how CO2 emissions\nin China have been reduced in the short term. And all this has been made\nvisible through digital technology, which accelerates many processes enormously\nand enables transparency that was previously unthinkable. This propels us right\ninto the topic that the European Union is currently dealing with: How can we\ndefend Europe’s prosperity when the drastic measures of climate law, aiming to\nreduce Europe’s gross CO2 emissions to zero by 2050 (“Green Deal”),\nand at the same time globalization and digitization are causing considerable\ndisruption to the European economy (the heart of our prosperity)? “Common\nsense” tells us that we cannot have everything at once. We need a strategy\nthat provides companies with an environment to remain competitive in the\nfuture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In this\nsituation, Thierry Breton, Commissioner for Internal Market, has proposed to analyze\nthe most important sectors of European industry, across all company sizes, in\nterms of their vulnerability to these challenges – and potentially to take\nmeasures to help affected sectors. For it is obvious that some sectors are more\naffected by a higher price for CO2 emissions, by digitization or even by the\nsometimes distorted global competition than others. Of course, this also raises\nthe question of how competition law and the rules on state aid could help. Irrespective\nof the failed merger of Siemens and Alstom, the question still arises as to why\nso many people want “European Champions”. It is the desire to see European\nmarket leaders in a global economy once again! In recent years, however, market\nleaders have mainly emerged from the market, and not through government\nplanning. There can therefore be no doubt that the principles of competition\nlaw and state aid law, as guaranteed by European law, must continue to be our\nyardstick in order to achieve a fair competition of companies, but also to achieve\nfair prices for consumers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
However,\nmany questions do of course arise regarding the details. Given the many threats\nin cyberspace, would it not be desirable if the number of European telecommunication\ncompanies was reduced and if they were able to take and enforce more extensive\ndecisions? This is an area in which the Member States still own significant shares.\nDecades ago, such shares made it possible for various national companies to\nbuild up Airbus, an undeniable success in a market, which was dominated by a US\nmonopoly at the time. European law does not prohibit this kind of mergers, but\nin the practice of the European Commission’s application of the law in recent\nyears they have become de facto unthinkable. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Therefore,\nin the interest of prosperity in Europe, it is a matter of asking such\nquestions anew – possibly with slightly new answers in some cases! This does\nnot, however, call into question the basic principles of our economic order; it\nis simply a matter of adapting them sensibly to the massive public demands for\nCO2 reduction, to digitization and to global competition with the USA and\nChina.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In summary,\nit is not a question of loosening competition law, but above all of adapting\nthe rules. The failed Siemens\/Alstom<\/em>\nmerger raised many questions, but many of these questions have never been\nadequately answered. One question, however, seems to me to be necessary in this\ncontext: The revision of the guidelines on market definition by Competition\nCommissioner Margarethe Vestager must be carried out soon, and not only in 2022\nas proposed by the Commission, because globalization and digitization have led\nto many processes being accelerated, so that markets are changing more\nquickly. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Secondly,\nwe as Europeans finally need to create the legal rules that we need to have a\nlevel playing field for all market participants (“reciprocity”),\nespecially in relation to China. Selling out the European economy to market\nparticipants that have been fed with state aid that would be illegal under EU\nlaw is definitely not our future prospect.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lastly, the horizontal guidelines need to be adapted to allow European companies, through cooperation, to generate the efficiencies offered by digitization. Uniform European rules are necessary for this. <\/p>\n\n\n\n We definitely do not need a so-called “European ministerial permission” – this has already been of little help in Germany. At the level of the European Union, this would require a unanimous decision in the Council of 27 Economics Ministers, which can be largely ruled out in view of the different structures and interests involved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Moreover,\nany kind of softening of antitrust law by vaguely formulated other objectives,\nsuch as “adaptation to the energy transition”, is not capable of\nwinning a majority and is even dangerous. In this sense, the letter from the\nEPP Group cannot be interpreted in the sense of a turning away from European economic\npolicy. Rather, we want the legal framework to be adapted swiftly so that our\nEuropean companies can enter into a fair competition with full force. It goes\nwithout saying that further measures are needed to achieve this: The proposals\nfor a genuine industrial strategy are therefore very welcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dr. Andreas Schwab is a Member of the European Parliament and spokesman for the European People’s Party in the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection. Schwab is one of the most influential competition politicians in the EU Parliament. <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Website: https:\/\/www.andreas-schwab.de\/ Twitter: @Andreas_Schwab<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" By Dr Andreas Schwab, MEP European champions and a relaxation of competition law are again being discussed in Brussels. Manfred Weber and Esther de Lange from the EPP group in the European Parliament have sent a letter to Commissioners Margrethe Vestager and Thierry Breton, published by Politico here. D’Kart asked Dr Andreas Schwab for a statement – he is a colleague from the same group as the authors of the letter and a competition lawyer who is well versed in…<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.d-kart.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/03\/COM-Timetable-Reforms-1024x663.jpg\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.d-kart.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/03\/Schwab_2-1024x691.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n