Gunnar Hökmark (PPE-DE), rapporteur. – Mr President, the roadmap for State aid reform from the Commission is a good and an important document. I hope that this report will contribute to the improvement of the State aid policy. Therefore, I should like to thank colleagues and shadow rapporteurs who have contributed to this improvement by the amendments and discussions we have had in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. I hope there will be, as there was in the committee, broad support for this new policy, which I hope will make an impact on the future guidelines on State aid policy that the Commission will be responsible for.

(SV) Mr President, Europe needs a competitive economy. As we say over and over again, we need new businesses, new jobs, new products and new markets. It is, therefore, also important to follow these matters up by ensuring that new, small companies operate under basic conditions as good as those under which old, large companies operate. Experience of various kinds teaches us that State aid always tends to safeguard old, existing companies at the expense of new and growing companies.

If we look around at the European economy, as well as at the international economy, we see very clearly that the new companies and the new products have emerged not through State aid but through the existence of sound basic conditions for businesses and individual entrepreneurs. Each type of State aid that distorts competition always tends to distort it at the expense of what is new and growing and to the advantage of what is old. This is therefore an issue that, to the highest degree, is about how we are to obtain new jobs and new businesses. A policy of State aid whereby we preserve businesses that are not very competitive, together with old products and low wages, will contribute to Europe lagging behind. However, a policy that aims for less State aid and at removing such State aid as distorts competition and that, moreover, invests resources in innovation and research will be able to produce a different outcome.

In European history, we have a lot to learn from a whole range of different experiences where State aid is concerned. In my report, I write that the Commission needs carefully to monitor and analyse these experiences, as well as the good experiences there are, because the objective of State aid is often popular and generally approved of. The problem is simply that the results of it are rarely what one had imagined they would be. As a consequence, we end up with old structures and with a dependency on subsidies, and we do not produce new jobs. We have seen this within the shipbuilding and steel industries and within a great many other sectors. Where State aid is introduced, renewal and transformation go out of the window. We must ensure that the opposite situation comes about.

An overarching objective of the report is to follow up the general aim not only of reducing State aid but also, as stated clearly in the report and still more clearly in the Commission’s document, of removing such State aid as distorts competition. A further objective is to ensure that those rules that exist are made clearer, for the aim must be to follow up the demand for less State aid. What is required is that State aid be predictable. It must not be possible for it to be used for relocations. The rules governing State aid must be generally applicable. The aid must not have a specific focus, but be directed across the board and not favour one company at the expense of another. That is extremely important when we debate innovation, for innovation policy must not be an excuse for increased State aid but be designed to create better basic conditions for innovation. The same applies to companies in the public interest. We must not have State aid that funds that type of activity excessively, but must give new companies opportunities to develop.

The same may be said of regional or environmental aid. It must be directed across the board and so made open and accessible to all. If we ensure that this happens and follow up the demands for increased scrutiny and transparency, better rendering of accounts and more stringent auditing, we shall lay the basis for a State aid policy that entails less State aid, and such State aid as there is will no longer distort competition. There will, however, be increased resources for innovation, a cleaner environment and thriving regions.