e-brod.com: Spevec: EU does not require the privatisation
Topic: Society
|
OLGICA SPEVEC, MEMBER OF THE CROATIAN NEGOTIATING TEAM WITH THE EUROPEAN UNION
Support measures for shipyards that are currently provided are not only inconsistent with the EU regulations but are also not compliant with our regulations. However, it is absolutely not true that new regulations forbid the state to stop providing support for the shipbuilding industry
Croatian shipyards are going
through one of the
most uncertain periods in
their history: they must find a
way out of the long-lasting agony
in which they operate on the
one hand, and on the other this
solution has to meet the requirements
of operating in the single
market of the European Union.
We discussed this issue with
Olgica Spevec, President of
the Competition Council of the
Croatian Competition Agency
and member of the Croatian
Negotiating Team with the European
Union in charge of the
Market Competition Chapter
and the Entrepreneurship and
Industrial Policy Chapter.
The shipyards have submitted
their restructuring plans to the
government. What will these
plans mean for their business?
At the moment, it is too soon
to talk about the contents of the
plans. It can only be said that
they are expected to give an answer
to the question, how and in
which period of time the shipyards
intend to become profitable. Besides, support measures
for shipyards that are currently
provided are not only inconsistent
with the EU regulations but
are also not compliant with our
own regulations and the Stabilisation
and Association Agreement
(SAA), in accordance with
which Croatia is obliged to harmonise
its aid system with that of
the European Union.
What will this aid system for
the shipbuilding industry look
like after the accession to the
European Union?
At the moment, the entire aid system
is tied to the agreed value of
a vessel and government guarantees
issued for the construction of
a vessel. Pursuant to the EU and
the new Croatian regulations, it
is allowed to grant aid funds for
research and development, innovation,
environmental protection,
new investments, etc. Types
of aid depend on the entity that
provides support. Germany, for
example, supports its shipyards
by issuing government guarantees
under strict terms and conditions.
Therefore, it is absolutely not
true that new regulations will
forbid the state, after accession
to the EU or after shipyards have
been restructured, to stop providing
support for the shipbuilding
industry. There are numerous
instruments that may be used by
the state to support shipyards, but
this relates only to those yards
that manage to successfully complete
the restructuring process
and begin to operate profitably.
Is it really possible that the
shipbuilding industry might
become a heavier burden for
our negotiations than ZERP
(the Protected Ecological and
Fishing Zone)?
I would not compare these two
issues. By entering into the Stabilisation
and Association Agreement,
Croatia has accepted the
obligation to harmonise its aid
system with that of the European
Union, and this has become part
of our legal system. Other countries
that acceded to the European
Union harmonised their systems
experiencing more or less difficulties
and demonstrating different
levels of determination. All of
them agree on one thing: the benefit
of joining the EU is still more
appealing than to remain outside
the Union. I firmly believe that,
if adequate efforts and endeavours
made, a solution can and
must be found, which will make
it possible to preserve, and even
improve, those segments of the
Croatian shipbuilding industry
that are good and worthwhile.
Nevertheless, many wonder
what will remain of the
Croatian shipbuilding industry
after the accession to the EU.
Nobody can tell that in advance.
The shipbuilding market is cyclic
– changes happen very fast and
have considerable consequences.
In addition to demand and supply
and the entry of new “players”,
the effects of cross-currency exchange
rates and movements in
the price of iron are very strong.
In spite of the efforts of the OECD
and the WTO, a global consensus
on the rules of the “game” in the
shipbuilding market has still not
been reached. Only those who
manage to adapt themselves to
those conditions, to neutralise
adverse impacts of the above
circumstances and to find a market
niche for their products can
survive in the world shipbuilding
market. The question does
not relate only to the fulfilling of
conditions for EU membership
but also to the developments at
a global level. Yet, unfortunately,
our approach to this issue is more
of an emotional than of an economic
and market nature even
though the shipyards are aware,
much more than the public and
the politics, of the direction to
be followed. Our shipyards are
expected to find a niche of their
own in the global market and to
introduce the market approach
into business in a manner even
more determined than before.
Is privatisation the solution?
The acquis communautaire of the
European Union does not require
the privatisation of shipyards.
The acquis is neutral with regard
to ownership types. Therefore,
it cannot be said that the EU requires
us to privatise the shipyards.
This can be supported by
the fact that, in some member
states, for example in Italy, there
exist also some state-owned shipyards.
Europe merely focuses on
the fact that restructuring processes
were most efficient when
a private investor was involved
who invested its own capital and
restructured a company together
with the state.
Source: PV International 28.04.2008.
By: Adriano Milovan
|
|
| |
| Article Rating | Average Score: 0
Votes: 0
|
|
|
