Search
It is independent of the quality of leaders of alliances or programs End of 2001 we have built a mean position700 Prius 2 commissioned in the world in 2008Monday they had to United in the Gallery of the UMP parliamentary dayAt the time the weekly had argued that it was an isolated skidCasio is to continue to cultivate its differenceThe dollar will remain the main reserve currencyFind the articles of the series of summer onOn the one hand the pure the other deviantsIn one the State Council pointed the problem with this order Director of Auby advice
Jean-François Auby: Marini amendment provides for the possibility to transform a local semi-public company (SEML) dealer of the distribution of gas in société anonyme (SA). However, according to the General code of territorial communities, a community cannot hold a minority stake in a SA. In other words, communities are majority in the capital of the SEML or they withdrew completely - and are therefore more no participation in the SEML issues. The question which immediately arises then is whether if the SA will be able to claim the monopoly. Today, the monopoly of distribution network management is attached to gas of France and the structures that had a public character (DNN) and only in their territory. These structures rely on a community that is itself licensing. If the SEML becomes a SA - i.e. without public capital-, there is more than monopoly. Hence the consequences cascade.
J F. A.: Not today, but tomorrow, at the end of the concession contract, I do not see on what basis could justify the maintenance of the monopoly of the SA that was previously a SEML. The monopoly of distribution networks is historically a public monopoly - with, on one side, gas of France and, on the other, the DNN which have a public status. This monopoly is justified by the public character of the operator. If it disappears, the history of the act as the General principles of French law and Community law, it can no longer justify a monopoly to a private company. All companies that, historically, have benefited from a monopoly and have been privatized have lost their monopoly. It is written very clearly in the first articles of the EC Treaty.
J F. A.: The monopoly of public management of gas distribution networks was asked by the Act of April 1946. What legislation did, another may a priori the undo. If it opposes the privatization of the DNN, we also oppose the gas of France.
J F. A.: If it was adopted by the State - can of course change in the parliamentary discussion-, it would have both networks managed by authorities, other managed by a SEML, others by SEML transformed her and finally the networks managed by a private company is calling Suez-gas of France. What would look like this found in other European countries. It is not a revolution, not over in any case that the privatization of gas of France; It is of the same order. And it is a logical step: seeing it privatizes gas of France, the DNN wonder how they will be able, in the current competitive world, to fight with their public status and all constraints are concerned.
J F. A.: for the moment, it only concerns gas. But the problem is the same for power. It could therefore be extended. There is no reason to apply it to gas, apart from the fact that the nature of public service is not as strong for the gas and electricity, gas is not universal. Some parliamentarians decided not to limit the amendment to the gas is a quite feasible hypothesis. There are also beautiful DNN electric... In any case, the CEOs of some of these companies often see an interest to pass in a structure of private law to no longer be mired in the statutes of authorities or SEML and thus have more room for manoeuvre. Other - shareholders communities - see further financial interest that this represents. Sell 51 of a DNN represents a net accounting value and a Fund of commerce that can reach several million euros. The former Mayor of Bordeaux Hugues Martin (ed.) an amendment to the Assembly on this point, if first thinking of the interests of the shareholder.
J F. A.: It will be probably reworked. It may for example to change the current law allowing communities to hold a minority stake between 0 and 51 in the capital of the new SA.
Read also:
