Finland must have a recipe for EU competitiveness, otherwise the decision will be made by others

Last week the President of the Commission Ursula von der Leyen announced the new commissioners and their portfolios. Next, the European Parliament examines the commissioner candidates and approves or rejects them.

At the same time, the commission is preparing policy guidelines for the next five years. The central theme of this commission is competitiveness. In many ways, Europe has lagged behind the pace of its competitors, the United States and China. There is also a threat that the green transition investments will escape Europe’s reach.

Great expectations are directed at what is done at the EU level. Former Prime Ministers of Italy Enrico Letta and Mario Draghi have presented their own ideas on how to improve Europe’s competitiveness as EU auditors.

One emerging theme is allowing larger corporate mergers. This is the old idea that Europe should allow “champion companies” that could compete with the Americans and Chinese in size.

However, the Commission has kept the Danish line of strict competition Margrethe Vestagerin under. However, the voice is changing on the clock, and the new race commissioner, a Spaniard Teresa Ribera is getting a different assignment. His task is to promote a “new approach to competition policy that would support the scaling of companies on the global market”.

In his report, Letta suggested that, for example, company mergers are needed in the financial, energy and telecommunications sectors. On the other hand, Finland is a good example of how fierce competition between telecommunications companies has led to good services and relatively cheap prices.

According to a recent study by the Commission, the concentration of the market in Europe has led to higher prices, lower wages and weakened the dynamism of the market.

The problem is that Europe does not compete in a vacuum and the United States, for example, does not play by the same rules. The USA does not have as strict competition rules, which has led to market concentrations and hegemonic positions, for example Google in the search engine market.

How to improve Europe’s competitiveness is the most pressing question. However, market concentration is not the answer. Big is not always good.

On top of everything, small countries are basically underdogs, because it is difficult to grow on a large European scale in small markets. Germany’s own home market is also huge. The concentration may therefore easily take place on the terms of large, central European countries.

It would now be important for the Finnish government to influence the direction in which the EU’s competitiveness debate develops. In EU politics, you can’t say no to everything, so you have to choose your battles carefully. What is Finland’s recipe for improving Europe’s competitiveness? It should be ready now.