Hargne et verdict du FT

Le Financial Times reste la référence suprême en matière d’orthodoxie économiste et libre-échangiste compétitive (et la seule lecture quasi-collective et quasi-imposée au sein de la Commission européenne). L’éditorial que le quotidien londonien publie le 25 juin sur le sommet de Bruxelles constitue, en un sens, le verdict mesuré et partagé par toute la communauté libre-échangiste transatlantique.

En voici l’essentiel, axé autour de l’action de Sarkozy à Bruxelles. C’est une défense sans condition du libre-échange et de la compétition, dont on nous rappelle que l’esprit général permet «de rendre les dirigeants d’entreprise honnêtes» (voir BAE-Yamamah).

«Competition as an abstract idea – still less as a “dogma” – is not the sort of thing that people rush to the barricades to defend. Yet it is fundamental to the European way of life and the prosperity Europeans enjoy. Competition keeps executives honest and prices low, allows fresh ideas to emerge and sweeps away incompetence, profligacy and corporate arrogance. It is too important to be the arbitrary plaything of the larger European states.

»That is why Mr Sarkozy’s little coup at the EU treaty negotiations is worrying. He persuaded his fellow leaders to drop the principle of “free and undistorted competition” from Article 3 of the old constitutional treaty. Until last Friday, that objective was right at the top of the draft document. Now it will be buried in a protocol annexed to the treaties, one of many such documents, agreed as sops to governments that have lost their arguments in previous summits. It risks becoming a point of interest in legal arguments, not a starting point.

»What now? Neelie Kroes, the EU competition commissioner, has vowed to continue with business as usual, scarcely a surprise. Tony Blair argues that EU leaders did not weaken the principle of undistorted competition, even if, regrettably, they missed a chance to strengthen it. That smacks of chopping logic.

»Mr Sarkozy, by contrast, argues that he has achieved an important triumph and that the jurisprudence of the European Union is likely to change. Although Mr Sarkozy has an incentive to exaggerate the change he may, sadly, be right to declare victory.

»Europe’s courts have often referred to the principle of undistorted competition in their judgments; now they must refer to a lowly protocol. It is hard to see how their interpretation of EU law can remain unchanged. The competition commissioner, too, will find that her position as an advocate in favour of competition and against state aid has been weakened.»

Mis en ligne le 26 juin 2007 à 07H43