The umbrella organization of the economy wants to revive the Corona loan program in order to cushion high energy costs for companies. These have previously benefited from low electricity prices for years. Now that it hurts to call for the state right away, it doesn’t fit with standing up for a liberal economic policy.
Should the state reactivate the Corona loan program for the electricity crisis? The umbrella organization of the economy, Economiesuisse, proposes this.
Once again, it seems to be true: Once created, government aid programs have a tendency to perpetuate themselves. It’s about the Corona bridging loans, with which companies quickly got money in spring 2020 to cover their fixed costs. At that time, the federal government had shut down economic life in order to reduce infections. Countless shops had to close from one day to the next. 138,000 companies took advantage of the offer.
The umbrella organization of the economy, Economiesuisse, apparently thinks that what used to work could be reactivated during the energy crisis. The possible shortage in winter has greatly increased electricity costs on the exchanges. That’s why you hear about companies whose electricity bills could multiply next year.
These companies should have access to government-guaranteed credit, the trade association suggests. The organization, which otherwise likes to work hard for the market economy, relies on the state to cushion the burden.
This fully comprehensive mentality is questionable for four reasons. First, the energy crisis does not come as a complete surprise. In fact, the turbulence started last fall when the price of gas and, as a result, the price of electricity rose sharply. The situation worsened with Russia’s attack on Ukraine in February. And since July, prices have risen sharply again.
We hear from electricity producers that large consumers have waited before signing new contracts because they are counting on electricity prices falling again over the course of the year – now the opposite has happened. Do you have to help here?
Secondly, companies that can buy electricity freely on the market from a certain consumption have benefited from low electricity prices over the past ten years. Nobody complained about that. Now that there is a “crack”, the state should fix it. This is a strange understanding of the market: when it supplies a company with cheap energy, people are happy to benefit; when it hurts, the taxpayer should help.
Third, rushing to help companies would reduce incentives to save. On the one hand, companies can save electricity and, on the other hand, smooth the price somewhat if they conclude contracts for several years rather than for one year. You can also choose between different electricity providers.
And finally, fourth: the electricity market is still functioning up to now, albeit with much higher prices. However, higher prices are hardly a temporary phenomenon that can be “bridged” quickly. If a company has a short-term financing problem, the first point of contact should always be the house bank.
Certainly, one can understand the anger of the companies. Because the crisis is not over after the coming winter. It is also homegrown – because of an Energy Strategy 2050 whose enormous flaws are becoming more and more evident. Incidentally, economiesuisse decided in 2017 to allow voting on the corresponding law.
There will only be a relaxation when more is invested in electricity production again. After all, the high prices motivate them to do so – finally, one might say, because for many years there was hardly any money to be made with Swiss hydropower, for example.
In order for investments to be made in Switzerland, however, politicians must ensure a reliable framework and thus planning security. Economiesuisse should focus its energy on this. If the credit program is revived instead, the state will be called upon every time a crisis is just looming. That doesn’t fit with a liberal economy – and not with an umbrella organization that otherwise propagates its values.