contents
The Federal Council is sticking to it: the three systemically important energy companies Alpiq, Axpo and BKW are to be put under a rescue package. And whether they want it or not. The state government wants to take precautions, in the spirit of the French journalist Émile de Girardin, who coined the phrase “gouverner, c’est prévoir” in the mid-19th century. The Federal Council wants to make provisions in the event that there are even more massive price swings on the European energy markets than before and one or more of the three large Swiss energy companies become insolvent.
Risk premium now set lower
The first draft for such a rescue package fell through in the consultation. Now the reaction is much friendlier. The Association of Swiss Electricity Companies (VSE) is still criticizing the compulsory nature of the rescue package. However, he welcomes it in principle and recognizes its necessity.
The reason for the change of heart: the Federal Council has receded and is clearly accommodating the energy companies. In particular, the “risk premium” to be paid annually in the event of a loan being taken out is significantly lower than originally planned. Namely 4 to 10 percent instead of 20 to 30 percent. A concrete example shows how big this difference is: If a company takes out a loan of CHF 1 billion, according to the first draft it would have had to pay a maximum of an additional CHF 300 million. According to the new proposal, there is a maximum of 100 million more.
Do you need this rescue parachute?
The big question is: Are the conditions of the bailout still strict enough, are they still a deterrent enough? After all, the rescue parachute is only good if it is only called upon in an extreme emergency. However, if the rescue package means that companies do less to be liquid at all times, then this state intervention in economic freedom will cause damage.
And this question also remains unanswered: is this rescue package absolutely necessary? Are the owners of the three major systemically important companies – mainly the cantons and communes – really unable to step into the breach in the event of a liquidity emergency?
Parliament will have to answer. Or may. Because in the case of the rescue package, the Federal Council deliberately refrains from emergency law and follows the ordinary legislative path. In doing so, he takes into account criticism from Parliament, which accused the Federal Council of governing too autocratically during the corona pandemic.