|
by Migeru
Via today's salon comes the following piece.
EUObserver: Commission has 'no reason' to question Fortis deal (29.09.2008) The European Commission said on Monday it had been consulted during the negotiations and had so far no reason to believe the deal was in breach of EU competition rules.If you check the Salon thread, you'll see that the consensus of all the commenters seems to be that this looks like a breach of 'State Aid Rules' as they would be applied in other industries. In fact, taking a cue from the discussions of the Paulson bailout, if the situation is one of insolvency and not illiquidity, the Commission's argument that the purchase did not exceed the going market rate cannot possibly be right. And in any case it was not a purchase of 50% of the shares, it was an equity injection. But if (as was argued on that thread) "Banks are the lynchpin of the economy" and that's why the Commission sees no reason to intervene on competition grounds, this signals something very important about the Commission's value system: The stability of the financial system trumps perfect competition in a single marketAnd if perfect competition is not the unquestionable top priority of the Commission, other national (and European) economic goals should be taken into account when non-financial businesses crucial to local economies fail and would need to be rescued. Also, when a Commission policy clearly is built around market competition as a goal rather than (as it should be) a policy to attain other goals, it needs to be called into question more forcefully on these grounds.
|
Menu
. Home
. About . Contact . New User Guide . FAQ . ET Editorial Guidelines . Search . Search (Google) Login
|
||
|
Bailouts, 'illegal state aid' and the Commission's value system | 34 comments (34 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
Bailouts, 'illegal state aid' and the Commission's value system | 34 comments (34 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
| ||||
| ||||