There are two reasons why the British government's reservations about Gazprom's interest in Centrica, owner of British Gas. One is that the recent closing of the gas tap to Europe demonstrates that Gazprom is an unreliable partner and not averse of threats. Putting the nation's gas in these sorts of hands, is risky. Secondly, the Putin government has a direct and interventionist role in Gazprom and the purchase of UK gas assets should be considered a renationalization. This is unacceptable.
Unfortunately, there are politicians out there who look for any reason to put obstacles in the way of foreign acquisitions and define foreign in there own ways when it suits, conveniently forgettin that their own companies are engaged in takeovers, even hostile takeovers.
Political interference and populism is unacceptable.
Onésimo Alvarez-Moro
See article:
Last week, Alan Johnson, Britain's industry secretary, attacked what he called protectionism. He was not talking about trade barriers. The context was the political opposition in Paris and Luxembourg to the offer for Arcelor by Mittal Steel.
Less than 24 hours later, rumours spread that Gazprom was planning a bid for Centrica, Britain's principal gas supplier. Mr Johnson's department assured the public that such a proposal would receive "robust scrutiny". Overseas readers unfamiliar with the elegant language of the British civil service should know that "robust scrutiny" is a rigorous process: one likely to continue until the Siberian permafrost melts.
See full Article.
Posts
