Discussion on the Controversial Proposal That Emmanuel Macron Has Fought Against
Emmanuel Macron's stance on the nationalization of ArcelorMittal is a no-go, and for good reason. Asked about the job cuts planned by the steelmaker, the French President ruled out any state intervention, stating it would be a waste of money and a false hope. Instead, he emphasized the need for guarantees of development to save the affected sites in Fos-sur-Mer and Dunkerque.
Many voices, including some unions, local politicians, and even former Minister of Economy Bruno Le Maire, have been calling for the state to intervene to save ArcelorMittal. Left-wing parties are especially vocal, proposing a temporary or permanent nationalization of the second-largest steel producer. This idea has been given momentum by the CGT union, which fears that ArcelorMittal might abandon its French sites to focus on more profitable locations, such as India and Brazil.
While the idea of nationalizing ArcelorMittal might seem attractive as a solution to job loss, the concept remains murky. As economist Nadine Levratto explains, there are various ways to nationalize a company, all of which involve taking control of the company and replacing its private governance with a public one. It could involve expropriating an owner and compensating them, or a public takeover bid, which is relatively expensive. The CGT estimates that buying the French sites alone would cost between 500 million and 1 billion euros, not including the estimated 1.7 billion euros needed for decarbonization efforts.
European examples of interventionism might give an idea of what could happen in France. In Italy, the state took control of the ArcelorMittal steelworks in Taranto, which could soon pass into Azerbaijani hands. In the UK, the government took control of the remaining blast furnaces threatened by their Chinese owner, leading to the abandonment of the job cuts plan and reviving the idea of nationalization.
However, the cost of nationalization remains uncertain, and the measure faces opposition within the political class, particularly in the center and on the right. Even among the unions within ArcelorMittal, not all are push for nationalization. The CFE-CGC, representing managers, views nationalization as the wrong solution, while the CFDT, which represents most workers, is open to the idea but calls for the company to account for its strategy first.
It's worth noting that ArcelorMittal had put its major decarbonization project at the Dunkirk site on hold, citing Europe's uncompetitive steel production. While negotiations are ongoing with the European Commission, the government considers it more pressing to restart this project than to nationalize it. The challenge today is to ensure that Arcelor invests in the Dunkirk site and others, notably in decarbonization.
In conclusion, the idea of nationalizing ArcelorMittal in France could be appealing as a quick fix for job preservation, but it would also present significant challenges for the country's economy and international relations. Moreover, the cost of nationalizing the company is uncertain, and the measure faces opposition from various quarters. The focus, instead, should be on ensuring that Arcelor invests in sustainable steel production and job preservation measures.
- The focus is instead on ensuring that ArcelorMittal invests in sustainable steel production and job preservation measures, as the cost of nationalizing the company remains uncertain and faces opposition within the political class, even among unions.
- In the general news, the discussion of policy-and-legislation regarding ArcelorMittal's potential nationalization is ongoing, with some calling for intervention, while others argue for business-driven solutions in the finance and industry sectors.
- The situation in France is reminiscent of previous instances of politics-related decisions in Europe, such as the state takeover of steelworks in Italy and the UK, which have had varying outcomes in terms of job preservation, finance, and industry.
