Competition policy – annual report 2020 (debate)
Speaker: Johan VAN OVERTVELDT (Belgium, European Conservatives and Reformists Group / Nieuw-Vlaamse Alliantie)
Date: 2021-06-07

  Johan Van Overtveldt,  rapporteur. – Madam President, let me flag you clearly that I was available here from the beginning of the session, even before Commissioner Vestager spoke, and we continuously got the signal that we were connected. So I don’t know what’s happening, but I find this really outrageous and I would like to ask you to check on your side how this is possible.
Madam President, Vice-President, Commissioner Vestager, colleagues, we’ve reached the point where the biggest crisis in decades is gradually coming under control – although ‘control’ has to be treated with care in this context. The vaccination campaign is key to recovery. I remain convinced that the EU has missed opportunities and has lost time. We will continue to carry this backlog in the recovery phase, and I hope that lessons will be learned from this.
In that recovery phase lies another challenge for the European institutions. The resources from the Recovery Fund must achieve their purpose. There is no place for inefficiencies, for irregularities, for illegal use.
But the recovery does not only depend on additional resources. The way the EU organises itself and prepares itself for the future will be equally decisive. Innovation and competitiveness will be important drivers. That was already the case pre-Corona, and it is of course now also the case.
The present report highlights some important elements related to our competitive environment, our growth potential and our relationship with major international players. We are also confronted with digital powers that know no territory or borders. Free and fair competition is crucial to drive innovation and growth and give consumers more choices, lower prices and better quality. We call for strict and impartial enforcement of EU competition rules. But these rules must also be updated concerning, of course, the digital age.
Recently, the debate has focused very much on the digitax, and yes, everybody agrees that the internet giants also have to make a fair contribution to tax receipts. That is important. But the big challenge in our relationship with these players lies elsewhere. The big tech companies are well organised enough to absorb and/or pass on those digital taxes to users and consumers.
The real challenge we face is the monopoly of these companies. After all, a digitax does not change that situation. It smothers smaller, innovative companies – they do not even get the chance to grow, with all the associated consequences in terms of innovation, growth and even employment.
This report examines the role of these digital players in more detail, and the relationship with governments and consumers. It welcomes the Commission’s determination to address unfair terms and practices of platforms acting as gatekeepers and eliminate illegitimate obstacles to online competition in the European digital single market. However, the slowness of anti-trust investigations mismatches fast-moving digital markets.
The report is particularly critical of the Commission’s handling of the Google search bias case, as well as the takeover of the WhatsApp messenger service by Facebook.
Structural unbundling of big tech monopolies may be desirable for restoring competition in digital markets, given the limits of fines and the failure of past behavioural remedies in certain anti-trust cases. The report calls on the Commission to review its merger and acquisition rules when it comes to asserting personal data.
In summary, we ask the Commission to monitor the evolutions in the digital market with persistence, efficiency and the appropriate speed. The report is, of course, not limited to the digital market. At the tail-end of the COVID crisis are important challenges on the road to efficient recovery. In that regard, we welcome the adoption of the temporary framework for state aid measures established in response to the unprecedented COVID—19 crisis.
We call on the Commission to be sure and monitor the proper use and distribution of the different EU funding measures in response to the COVID-19 crisis, which should be in accordance with EU competition and state aid rules. We are in need of a post COVID-19 roadmap for better-targeted state aid in order to promote competitiveness and safeguard jobs.
We also urge the Commission to pay attention to the role of the foreign-based state-owned enterprises that are supported and subsidised by their governments in ways that the EU single market rules prohibit for EU entities. There has to be some serious concern about distortive state-funded competition from foreign undertakings acquiring European undertakings.
Last but not least, the report calls for reflection on possible distortions of competition arising from the European Central Bank’s corporate bonds purchases.
We’re at an absolutely historical point for our economies, for the welfare of our citizens. Do we succeed in bringing about a sustained and healthy recovery? Appropriate monetary and budgetary policies are much needed, but so is also a robust competition policy.
Let us avoid the historic mistake made by the American President, Franklin Roosevelt, in his New Deal. Roosevelt’s National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) of 1933 contained many solid, constructive and much-needed measures, but this NIRA also limited competition, allowed cartels, allowed collusion and even stimulated price fixing. A lot of research has gone into NIRA and the results are unequivocal. The results of these anti-competitive measures were a substantial rise in inflation, a reduction of growth by at least 25%, and substantially less job creation.
Let us avoid these kinds of mistakes. Let us take robust competition policy and its implementation very seriously.