Every morning, Nicolas Beytout analyzes political news and gives us his opinion.
This Wednesday, he returns to the resale of Engie's shares in Suez to Veolia despite pressure from the State, which did everything to avoid the operation.
The water battle is over. Engie has decided to sell its stake in Suez to Veolia. This makes possible the birth of a French champion internationally, but it is also a date in the history of French capitalism.
Yes, there will be a before and an after Suez.
It is a battle that has been well fought.
An intense month, during which Suez (which Engie wanted to sell) did everything to escape Veolia, its long-standing competitor.
A month during which the State, which is the largest shareholder of Engie, has tried everything to influence the operation.
Until threatening to block the maneuver, in vain ...
Engie ignored the will of its main shareholder, the State.
This is a pretty incredible thing and, at first glance, a snub for the State shareholder and for Bruno Le Maire.
In fact, the Minister of Finance must not be all that bad.
Of course, he was outvoted, but as a politician, he was able to put forward the defense of Employment, he demanded a French solution and he can boast of having given everything to defend the point of view. de Suez, the one who was in the position of game (defending the weak for a politician, it always pays off).
At the same time, as a representative of the state shareholder, he can rub his hands while contemplating the pretty check for 3.4 billion euros that his company Engie is going to cash.
The point is, the state was beaten on Engie's board. It's a first !
It is true.
But let us remember what happened just a few months ago, when Bruno Le Maire had ultimately derailed the alliance project between Renault and Fiat.
He had, in the name of the State, the same power over Renault as today over Engie.
And this time he made himself heard.
No, I think that in the Engie-Veolia-Suez affair, the political interest of the State shareholder was tilted against the interest of the company.
For decades, the State, in all the companies in which it is a shareholder, has hesitated on its role, on its real power to manage the company.
Should he act according to the demands of the company, or should he put his political priorities first?
Should he, for example, defend profitability or social, nationality or openness to the world?
The Suez affair is therefore a turning point?
Yes, and everyone will quickly think about a change in doctrine.
It is very concrete: the State as a shareholder means hundreds of thousands of jobs in France.
Already, the State is almost powerless in the face of a logic of private enterprise of the Bridgestone type where it has been humiliated.
And seeing the state shareholder align, willy-nilly, with the behavior of an ordinary capitalist, responsible not for its own political line but for the particular interest of the company, it is a new era.
This will obviously force us to fall back on the idealized role of a state-strategist and to revise all the fantasies about a new capitalism resulting from the post-Covid era.