Counter-proposal To Rescue - The Councils Of State Want To Break Up Energy Companies

– Councils of State want to break up energy companies “

The rescue package for energy companies is on the brink at the State Council. The councilors want to reject the bill – an explosive proposal.

Published: 06/14/2022, 17:09

The state councils only want to save energy companies if they sell their shares. Critics fear it will be sold to foreign investors. The Muttsee dam wall in Linthal during the opening ceremony. (archival image)

Photo: Axpo (Keystone)

This week, the State Council will decide on a rescue package for energy companies. The umbrella is designed to ensure that the power supply in Switzerland continues even if the system-critical company encounters a liquidity bottleneck – i.e. cannot supply electricity. It happened a few months ago: shortly before Christmas 2021, Alpiq asked the federal government for financial aid of over a billion francs due to the consequences of soaring electricity prices. In the end, this was achieved without the government’s help. But with the war in Ukraine, the risk increased again.

The Federal Council now wants to make provisions that will allow loans to be granted to critical energy companies – Alpiq, Axpo and BKW – loans. Firms would have to cover the costs of this “insurance” through an annual flat rate and respect the transparency rules. Following the consultations, the Federal Council eased the rules somewhat and limited its possibilities of exerting influence. But the template remains controversial.

Behind him are now interested cantons and interested energy companies, with the exception of BKW. In principle, however, companies would prefer to be saved under a state of emergency – as bourgeois councilors have suggested – without having to contribute to the cost of state insurance.

The Federal Council should have the books

Now a group of bourgeois members of the Council of State is seeking the bill to be rejected by the Federal Council with the task of drawing up a new one. However, the application does not mention unconditional rescue. On the contrary: stricter conditions are required. The federal government should only be allowed to support energy companies if they have exhausted all possible restructuring measures. The capital increases and the sale of shares and assets (divestments) are explicitly mentioned.

So in order to receive money from the state, companies – which are now largely owned by the cantons and municipalities – would have to sell their farms and production facilities. Foreign investors could also come into play here. As soon as the company receives state support, inheritance proceedings must be opened. Then the federal government will take over the scepter, business interventions will be allowed. Affected businesses would literally be smashed.

But should energy companies already sell their shares and production facilities as a precautionary measure? Only if there is a liquidity problem? Critics describe the first variant as nonsensical. These are healthy companies, says US vice president Thurgau and Axpo board member Jakob Stark. The proposal is questionable from a legal point of view. State aid conditions would have to be “reasonably unattractive”. But with the proposal in line with the rejection motion, the state would interfere too much.

The second option is unrealistic from the critics’ point of view. According to experts, an injection of billions may be needed within 24 to 48 hours. The sale of the shares would take far too long, says Solothurn SP councilor Roberto Zanetti. You can also do without legal regulation right away. “Incidentally, the obligation to sell and sell the shares would be the first step towards the disintegration of our energy companies. Related to the risk of selling important infrastructure to foreign investors or sovereign wealth funds. “

Have you lost your right to exist as a company?

FDP state councilor Graubünden Martin Schmid does not want his motion, which was jointly signed by the Central States councilors and the SVP, to be understood in this way. Schmid says he only wants to make sure that companies and their owners are doing everything they can to prevent future liquidity shortages in the face of the threat of restructuring proceedings. He himself sits on the board of directors not included in the rescue package of the Engadine power plant.

In a market economy system, it can also mean divesting shares, adding capital, taking loans from banks or reducing hedging transactions. The risk has been known since the December Alpiq case. If, nevertheless, there is a liquidity problem that the company is unable to resolve, it is a sign that the business model is not working. A company that benefits from state aid must “change fundamentally”.

One thing is for sure: if the Council votes against on Thursday, it will lead to a further delay. The first was due to the fact that the matter was not discussed in the US Council until the summer session. Energy Minister Simonetta Sommaruga would like both councils to take care of this so that the rescue package is available as soon as possible.

Charlotte Walser has been part of the Tamedia editorial team since 2021. Doctor of Philosophy has been working as a journalist since 1995. In 2010-2020, she reported to the Keystone-SDA news agency of the Federal Palace. The next stations were InfoSüd and the UN refugee organization UNHCR.