French risk sanctions over blockade
|
|
The French government's attempted capitulation to militant fishermen
and truckers may all be in vain. One of the EU's founding nations and an tireless advocate of
'communautaire' thinking is about to discover that Union membership has costs
as well as considerable political benefits. Buying off the fishermen who blockaded Calais with capped diesel
prices and social security charges exemptions of up to 100% is generous but it
can be afforded by a government whose budget deficit is shrinking by the
day. As for the truckers once again clogging up France's highways, they
should bite off the hand of Communist Transport Minister Jean-Claude Gayssot
when he offers them a 35-centimes per litre cut in fuel tax worth 1,630 pounds
per lorry or 100 million pounds per year in total. If they don't, they are going to find that Brussels may stop them
getting anything. The trouble is - and Gayssot appears to have gone into
negotiations without a lawyer present - that both packages look to be in
flagrant violation of EU law. Article 87 of the EU's treaty specifies that
any aid granted by a member state ... which distorts or threatens to
distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of
certain goods shall, insofar as it affects trade between Member States, be
incompatible with the common market . A statement on subsidies agreed by all 15 Union governments including
French President Jacques Chirac back in June 1996 allows social security
charges to be cut as long as they do not exclusively apply to sensitive
or crisis sectors . The case against looks cut and dried. It seems to be me to be
not at all easy to fit what they appear to be doing within established
precedents which have been established over the past several years, says
Ian Forrester QC, a lawyer in the Brussels office of law firm White &
Case. In July 1998, the European Commission forced 1,200 Belgian firms to
repay aid paid to them by the government under a special scheme known for some
reason as 'Maribel' to protect small exporters against the impact of a soaring
exchange rate. Just like the French fishermen's scheme, Maribel provided for
cuts in social security contributions for specified sectors with no
accompanying restructuring programme for the sector. A year earlier, the commission had similarly vetoed a
200-million-pound French plan to cut social security contributions for 13,000
textile, clothing and leather/footwear firms again because this favoured one
sector over others. Paris has an added and more serious problem with the plan to cut
diesel prices for road hauliers. Changes to minimum excise duty rates not only
requires the say-so of the commission but the unanimous agreement of all 15 EU
finance ministers - including those in Italy and Germany, whose hauliers would
demand equivalent treatment if they caved in to French pressure. Although none of this is likely to happen, the French are unlikely to
be perturbed.It's fair to say that France has an attitude to Community
legal obligations different to that of the UK, says Forrester. The
French authorities have the worst record for implementing agreed EU laws and
the longest delays (18 months) before measures take effect. France is far and
away the EU country most likely to be under investigation for non-compliance
with Union laws. The UK will go to considerable lengths to avoid doing things
that will end them up in the European Court, says Forrester. The
French, on the other hand, are extremely sensitive to civil unrest to an extent
that is extraordinary.
Even if they lose, the length of time it takes to get to court to
recover illegally paid subsidies - the Belgian 'Maribel' case took five years
before the commission even sued and seven before the cash was returned - means
that the French may well just hand out the cash and be damned.
| 
