The confirmation of the forecast sale of the State’s* majority stake in the Nice airport, as stipulated in the Macron law (art. 67), has landed on the desk of Nice’s mayor and provoked a reaction worthy of his status as a man of action.
No sooner said than done, Christian Estrosi announced his opposition to this privatization and that he would propose three amendments to this bill during its examination in Parliament: One, quite logically, concerning the granting of the right of preemption to local authorities, the others to limit the sale to a minority stake and the obligation of approval of local subjects would mean devaluing the asset.
But, as they say in these cases, Parliament is the expression of the people’s sovereignty, so we’ll see the final text of the law.
We have already explained in previous articles that the main reason for this action by the mayor of Nice is the conviction, which is moreover a certainty, that a privatized management of the airport service concession (we must recall once again that the land will remain with the State) would be a hindrance to the attractiveness of the territory.
Beyond the capitalistic model, which can be appreciated, or less so, or not at all in total freedom of thought, the reasons that would explain this thesis remain mysterious unless they arise from a doctrinal or empirical corpus.
The proof, on the contrary, is that almost all airports worldwide are managed by private companies, and there is no information about the territories affected having suffered prejudices, quite the opposite.
Moreover, the defense of the territory’s interests, the quality and seriousness of the investor(s) can be guaranteed beyond the shareholding weight by “agreements” and “covenants” widely applied in corporate sales and of which former banker Emmanuel Macron will undoubtedly have perfect knowledge.
To give substance to the protest aspect of his reaction, Christian Estrosi also communicated that he will propose on December 19 at the Nice municipal council to vote on a resolution to propose to the people of Nice a consultation by local referendum on the future of the airport, which, in this case, will take place on February 20.
According to the mayor of Nice, article L1112-15 of the CGCT allows for consulting the voters: “Voters of a local authority can be consulted on decisions that the authorities of that authority plan to make to resolve matters within its competence”.
Lawyers will certainly say in the coming days whether this referendum is possible or not, given that we’re talking about a national law outside local jurisdiction, that the City of Nice is not a shareholder of the company, and that the same mayor of Nice speaks of ‘territorial attractiveness’, which is a broader definition than just the city of Nice (why not extend it at least to the Metropolis or the department? Besides, isn’t the company called Nice Côte d’Azur Airport?).
In any case, this consultation, which cannot have prescriptive value, will still have an impact in terms of political propaganda like the one organized by the Socialist Party against the tunnel of tram line 2, to which the mayor of Nice gave no legitimacy.
The opposition will have a field day commenting and contrasting the referendum proposal, which will undoubtedly be voted in by the disciplined and obedient municipal majority.
Gaël Nofri, municipal and metropolitan councilor of the Independents group, reacted to this intervention:
“The mayor of Nice’s announcement of his intention to organize a referendum on the future of the airport is the latest communication operation of a mayor lacking in affection. But in fact, a referendum for what?
To say no to a law providing for the privatization of the airport?
Even if we can regret this abandonment of Nice by the Socialist State, or even, as I do, condemn it, the Law of the Republic imposes itself on us. The real question that Christian Estrosi avoids is: what to do faced with a privatization over which we have no control?
Also, I believe that the real referendum is not so much that of Nice airport but that of the tramway tunnel. Clearly, do the people of Nice want to lose 500 million euros in the unnecessary tunnel of line 2, or do they intend to devote this money to buying back a tool essential to the development of the Côte d’Azur territory? Both will not be possible, and a choice will have to be made. Here, common sense prevails for all, and the referendum on the “Estrosi tunnel”, so often refused by the mayor, resurfaces.
Another question, albeit secondary, would be if an elected official who claims to be Gaullist would resign from his mandates if the “NO” were to prevail?
Each is now faced with their contradictions”.
