|
|
EXCHANGE OF VIEWS with Mr. Peer STEINBRÜCK, German Minister of Finance
Commissioner Kroes presented the Commission’s annual Competition Report for 2006 stating that she was not worried by the decision by EU leaders to move the commitment to free and undistorted competition from the objectives of the draft constitution into a protocol to the newly proposed reform treaty. She stressed that the protocol was legally binding, and that the same rules would continue to apply as now.
“The protocol to the treaty is a legally binding confirmation that the system of undistorted competition is part of the internal market”, Ms Kroes said.
Ieke van den Burg (PES, NL) said she appreciated this reaction: “You are right, competition is not an end in itself; it is a tool, and I fully support the Commission using competition as an instrument for the internal market.”
Jonathan Evans (EPP-ED, UK) said it was a gloomy day, and was worried by President Sarkozy’s comments, as he put it, “that competition has done nothing for Europe, that protectionism is no longer taboo, and that he favours European champions.”
Gunnar Hökmark (EPP-ED, SE) said: “It seems that competition is something everybody wants until they get it.” This was the first time in 10 or 20 years, he said, that the credibility of competition policy was being questioned in this way. He recommended a strict enforcement of state aid rules, with a view to decreasing it, ensuring cross-border mergers were made possible and following closely the work of the Intergovernmental Conference.
Ms Kroes said she could agree on those three points but disagreed on the interpretation of the summit’s conclusions: “They have moved the furniture round, but the house is still there. The protocol is of equivalent status to the treaty. [...] You can be annoyed, but there is no need to be worried. Competition policy is an integral part of the concept of the internal market. The rules and the role of the Commission have been fully safeguarded. There is no question of downgrading.”