Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-10-21-Speech-2-468"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081021.43.2-468"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I am impressed by honourable Members’ involvement with this dossier and I have paid great attention to all the remarks made this evening.
A couple of Members made the comparison with the situation in Germany. The total size of the three shipyards in Poland – Gdynia, Gdańsk and Szczecin – is comparable to the size of the German shipyards prior to their restructuring, and the aid already granted to the Polish shipyards in the period 2002-2008 is also comparable to the aid granted by Germany to its shipyards – around EUR 3 billion. So there is a basis for comparison.
However, from both the perspective of competition distortion and of safeguarding stable employment, the length of the restructuring process in Poland is an aggravating factor. Whereas the shipyards in Germany were privatised in 1993 and finalised their restructuring in 1995-1996, the Polish shipyards have continued subsidised operations for a very long time, since well before the Polish accession to the EU, and have been bailed out several times since then.
I have mentioned before that now, in 2008, more than four years have passed since the accession of Poland to the EU, and eight years since the first state aid rules were introduced in Poland in 2000 pursuant to the 1994 Association Agreement. In addition, the shipbuilding industry has been benefiting from an unprecedented boom over the last five years. That should also be taken into account: even during a period of a booming sector, it was not possible to put the Polish shipyards in a viable position, so that is something we have to take into account. Even during that period things were not working properly in a way comparable to the other shipyards.
So if we take into account that the boom, with an assured inflow of orders and ever-increasing prices, created favourable conditions for conducting a far-reaching restructuring in Poland, then that chance has not been utilised by Poland. Industry experts already forecast a downturn, an overcapacity in the world market in the two or three years to come.
To conclude, the comparison with Germany might be meaningful. Yes, it is close by; yes, it is nearby a comparable situation. It shows that the Polish shipyards are treated exactly the same as the German shipyards. The same criteria are applied when assessing the state aid, with viability being the most prominent of them.
Finally, a parallel should also be drawn with cases where the Commission has not authorised state aid and even ordered recovery of illegal state aid in other Member States. In the shipbuilding sector I recall negative decisions ordering repayment of aid – as some of you will remember – with regard to the Spanish public shipyard IZAR, to Greek shipyards and a couple of other ones.
If Mr Bielan is saying – as I too said in my remarks – we have taken years, then this is because of the economic, social and symbolic importance of the yards. Yes, we did. I dare to defend that, but the best thing we can give to the heroes of the yards is a viable future, and that is what I am asking you for: just a realistic approach, the approach that those heroes deserve.
A question was asked about European shipbuilding. The Commission, in cooperation with the European shipbuilding industry, is actively implementing an integrated strategy – and we call it ‘Leadership 2015’ – aimed at increasing the competitiveness of the shipbuilding industry in all the Member States of the European Union. In that context, work is ongoing in helping industry in Poland and elsewhere to address the key challenges facing the sector by, for example, facilitating innovation and better protection of intellectual property rights. Continuous subsidisation cannot be an answer to challenges to competitiveness.
We in the Commission, like you, are interested in a viable industry that can operate without state intervention and without state aid and compete on its own merits. That is the case for many shipyards in Europe, particularly in the sector of technologically sophisticated vessels.
Mr Tomczak and a number of other Members compared the financial sector situation of today and the banking situation, and who does the economy serve? The declining EU share of world shipbuilding will not be reversed by keeping yards in unsustainable activity, and Mr Chruszcz and Mr Tomczak touched on the general line with the financial crisis. I tried to explain this in my first statement. I would like to say a little more on the questions asked by some of you.
I want to do my utmost to give you an answer and, if you will allow me, I shall take a little time and try to explain what the reality is at the moment.
A question was asked about the possibility of applying state aid rules less strictly in the light of state aids currently approved by the Commission for financial institutions. This is an interesting question, and it is not only within your meeting of today. But it is also a fact that we have to see why the Commission seems to be stricter in the Polish shipyard cases, while it authorises massive aid to European banks.
The situation of the Polish shipyards, if you will allow me to say so, is completely different to that of the banking sector. There are two reasons, which I shall explain to you. No 1: the bankruptcy of a major European bank could trigger the collapse of a number of other financial institutions and produce systematic negative effects on the whole economy of one or more Member States. So we are currently considering emergency short-term aid measures for banks, as opposed to restructuring aid spread over many years for the Polish shipyards. By the way, if banks were to require longer-term state support, they too would be subject to similar requirements to the Polish shipyards. They have to deliver a credible restructuring plan. They have to ensure a long-term viability for their beneficiaries. So it is indeed a fact that, within the banking sector at the moment, we are also approaching the banks with restructuring and viable business plans for the future.
I do not see why some of you are so concerned with the nationality of the purchasers of the assets of the yards. If they are the ones who are the real entrepreneurs and if they are the ones who are interested in those assets, let us go for it. We owe it to the workers of the yards to seek a solution without regard to nationality or protectionism. That is not the answer I would like to give to the workers who are interested in their jobs, in jobs that are viable.
I am very glad that a couple of Members recognise that the yards are flexible and that we do not make a religion out of it. If only producing ships is the only opportunity, I think we are not dealing with these cases in a professional way. There should be sustainable production of whatever product over there with the craftsmanship of those people. If demand is growing and the workers and the yards are competent, which I believe – as you were mentioning – then we can give them a chance by freeing them from the burden of past state aid.
I shall try to conclude, as I can read your body language. One of the main issues that I was faced with is: can you not give more time? Is that the way we should deal with this very difficult issue? I think that all those workers have the right to ask us to come up with a viable solution for their future. What we, the Commission, are presenting and what we are asking the Polish Government and where we badly need your backing towards the Polish Government is that they are aware. Just deliver the business plan for Gdańsk. Please, please, please. And just be aware that for Gdynia and Szczecin there is an opportunity.
There is a future, but then we have to act in such a way that the burdens of all those to be repaid state aid over recent years are taken off the assets and that, with the assets in a bundling, there is a new future for activities in both yards and in both areas and regions.
It is absolutely crucial that those assets are not with that burden, for if there is that burden on the shoulders of those assets then there is less interest from investors. That, indeed, is the law of just thinking over the solution. If the liquidation is to be done, it can be parallel, and if it is parallel then it does not take that much time.
If I had to face all those workers, then I would prefer to say, please go with this solution which the Commission is offering. If you accept it, it can be done quickly, and do not tell me that, because the law in Poland is the way it is, you cannot change a law. I am not absolutely sure that the law is able to fit in this solution, but if that is the case then you can just act as a government. With my experience in the last century in another position, I know – and I knew – that if you want a solution, there is a way out. I ask you from my heart, for all those workers: please address the Polish Government.
Mr Buzek started by giving an explanation of the situation in Poland, and he rightly mentioned that we should be prepared to offer a positive solution to maintain business activities. We
offering a positive solution to maintain business activities. If investors are interested in shipbuilding, as some say they are – and we got that message not only from one member of the government but also from different sides – then they can bid for the assets, and that is what I was underlining. Please take into account that, as far as the Commission is concerned, the solution could result in viable economic activities in Poland. We have to talk about viable economic activities, because I do not want to present the workers who are involved with something that is not viable.
It has taken too much time. All those people have the right to know what is going on and what their future will be, and no one is expecting that we will just say: let us go on, what the hell, what can we do now, let us just continue with what we have been doing. We are aware that this is not a viable situation any more. Having said that, we, the Commission, did our utmost to come up with a solution.
Therefore, as I said earlier, firstly, for Gdańsk, the Polish Government should offer us a business plan in which there is a viable future. All the craftsmen there can do an extremely good job and are already doing a job which there is good reason to think could be expanded – after all, it is privatised, the owners have made investments and there is a possibility that this can continue. However, we badly need a business plan, and that is what I am asking you for. You who are so involved in the Polish situation should just address your Polish Government and say: ‘Come on, boys and girls, now you have to deliver. We, as Members of the European Parliament, no longer accept the fact that you are not delivering.’ In other words, they are not delivering a solution to the question that you have in mind.
Assuming that the Gdańsk side of the problem is approached in the way I mentioned, then I will now come to the two other shipyards. I have just described to you that Gdynia and Szczecin could be approached with an employment future that is viable. That is what we are talking about, and that is why I mentioned the example of Olympic Airways. Of course, they are completely different: one is shipbuilding and the other is flying. But, having said that, the original thought behind the Olympic Airways solution was liquidation and then assets, without the burden of paying back all those large amounts of money, and then, with the new investors, giving these undertakings an opportunity to find a viable future.
Mr Schulz, we did not say that the yards should be shut. We are seeking a way for them to be strong enough to resist the coming recession and with the activities which are most likely to be profitable on those sites, and there lies the opportunity for both of the shipyards, once the assets are bundled, taking into account that there are a couple of potential investors who are interested in just giving them a viable future.
Ms Schroedter, the Polish yards have had a longer transition than the East German yards, and during a booming period of the economy. Not only Mr Chruszcz, but also Mr Czarnecki, if you are comparing this to the situation in the German shipyards, – and it is right to say that there is a parallel with the German shipyards – then I have two general remarks.
Firstly, we need to realise that the shipbuilding industry in other countries, such as Denmark or the UK, where the public purse was not so generous, was considerably downsized or even closed. I have some claim to know about this: in my own country quite a number of shipyards had to be closed. So if we speak about equal treatment, we need to take into account that in other Member States of the European Union there is a history of closing shipyards which can no longer be viable."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples