France: Government pressurises Total to preserve jobs in Dunkirk
Description
In a BFM radio interview on 1 February 2010, the French Industry Minister, Christian Estrosi, told that the government will not accept the oil giant Total closing the refinery in Dunkirk, Flanders , as long as no other economic activity is guranteed and the jobs of 360 workers at the refinery and another 400 workers representing the suppliers are secured. He added that the government understands that a reorganisation of the branch may be needed due to a decline of the consumption of oil products, but insisted that jobs must be preserved in a highly profitable company like Total.
In December 2009, Total announced that it considers to shut down the the refining activity in Dunkirk. Reacting to the Government's concern, Total explained in a press release on 1 February 2010 that it will make an effort to:
- guarantee for each worker an employment at Total (according to a press release by the Industry Ministry on 8 March 2010, this is now confirmed)
- assure the survival of the plant in Flanders. The plan is to create a centre of technical assistance for refinery operations and a training centre
- examine the participation in the methane plant project of EDF, Elécricité de France (according to a press release by the Industry Ministry on 8 March 2010, an accord between Total and EDF has been found)
- help preserving the suppliers' network in the region
Total proposed to provide a definite plan regarding the continuation of the plant by midyear.
This impact of this state pressure is likely to discriminate against foreign commercial interests as Total is likely to have transferred or consolidated activites in its subsidiaries abroad. Foreign interests harmed by this state measure are juristictions where Total has established subsidaries.
Any Evidence-Based Deliberation:
| Question | Result |
|---|---|
| Is there anything in the public record to suggest that evidence of the effectiveness of the proposed measure was considered during official deliberations? | Don't know |
| Is there any evidence that alternatives to the proposed measure were considered? | Don't Know |
| Is there anything in the public record that suggests that empirical evidence informed the comparison across the alternatives available to government? | Don't Know |
| Was such evidence identified? | Don't Know |
| Is such evidence publicly available? | Don't Know |
| Did the official decision-maker in question provide an explanation as to why a chosen measure was favoured over alternatives? | Don't Know |
| Is there any evidence to suggest that potentially affected trading partners were consulted before the measures were taken? | Don't Know |
| Is there any evidence that safeguards have been put in place to ensure that implementation of the initiative is transparent and non-discriminatory? | Don't Know |
| Did the government state its intention to review the measure within one year of implementation? | Don't Know |
Date Discovered: 01/02/2010
Implemented: Yes
Date of inception: 1 Feb 2010
GTA Evaluation: Amber
Source:
1) BFM interview with Christian Estrosi (http://www.radiobfm.com/edito/info/56885/christian-estrosi-nous-voulons-...)
2) France Info interview with Michel Bénézit, Director General of refinery and marketing at Total (http://www.france-info.com/france-social-2010-02-01-total-reporte-sa-dec...)
3) Press release of Total on 1 February 2010 (http://www.total.com/fr/investisseurs-institutionnels/communiques-de-pre...)
4) Press release of the Industry Ministry on 8 March 2010 (http://www.minefe.gouv.fr/discours-presse/discours-communiques_finances....)
5) 2nd Press release of the Industry Ministry on 8 March 2010 (http://www.minefe.gouv.fr/discours-presse/discours-communiques_finances....)
Government Response:
- 503 reads
