Photo : D.R.
Hervé Novelli is Secretary of State in charge of Trade, Artisanship, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises, Tourism, Services and Consumption. The deputy of the Indre-et-Loire region and Mayor of Richelieu, he has also previously been the head of two SMEs in the paramedical sector. Hervé Novelli has been Minister in charge of Chambers of Commerce and Industry since 2007.
Commerce International: On 29 July this year, you finally managed to present to the French Ministerial Council your draft law relating to the reform of Chamber networks. Can you review the gist of this text?
Hervé Novelli: “The draft law adopted on 29 July by the Ministerial Council reforms the territorial organisation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry (CCI) and that of Chambers of Trades and Artisanship (CMA), in order to ensure better service to companies, taking into account proposals made by each of the networks during the discussions they held. The regional CCIs will see their roles stepped up in terms of economic events, the distribution of resources between Chambers in the region, and the pooling of management functions. Chambers will become territorial CCIs legally attached to the regional Chamber, and will continue to offer essential close-range services to companies.”
What was the opinion of the State Council on this draft?
H.N.: “The State Council validated the territorial Chamber organisation proposed by the government, and notably the attachment of basic establishments to the regional establishment. We now have an ambitious updated text that will confer to regional-level Chamber companies a strong economic competence in the face of territorial authorities.”
Catherine Vautrin, in charge of presenting the draft, seemed quite pessimistic only a few weeks ago about the time schedule. Some people no longer counted on the presentation before the Ministerial Council taking place in July. Can you tell us when you hope for a definitive voting in of the law?
H.N.: “The objective is to make the new structures operational on 1 January 2011, which necessitates electing the Chamber assemblies several months beforehand in a renewed electoral regime – I am notably thinking of an election of territorial and regional representatives in the one vote. As the electoral procedure will also last several months, I hope that the definitive voting in of the law will take place at the start of 2010.”
You say that this draft law emanates from a consultation of Chamber networks. Nevertheless, protests have been lively within the network. One initial reason for discord resides in the “regionalisation” of Chambers. What do you have to say to those CCIs that still regret that new local structures will now be “subject” to their region?
H.N.: “I can understand why certain territorial CCIs are worried about the way they will be attached to regional CCIs. This legal innovation seemed necessary to ensure the coherence of initiatives and to pool together support functions. We all know that regionalisation remained only embryonic after the previous reform dating back already to 2004, as it was organised on a voluntary basis. I know that I can count on Chamber networks to make the regionalisation foreseen in this draft law a success, and to thus bring, with efficiency and coherency, the services which our country’s companies will need in the coming years.”
Another protest comes from seven Chambers of Commerce, including large agglomerations in France such as Paris, which wrote to you to obtain a report on the draft law. They essentially argue that no sound reform of the CCIs can take place unless it is not brought in line with the reform of territorial authorities underway, notably to take into account the country’s economic reality and to allow the necessary Chamber structures to coincide with this. What have you replied to these Chamber Presidents?
H.N.: “I reply that there can be no ‘sound reform of the CCIs’ without an adapted and renewed structural framework. The reinforcing of regional weight will not prevent, nor dispense Chamber officials from finding appropriate modes of tackling the specificities of different territories covered by the region. On the contrary, by becoming frontline economic players, regional CCIs will have a better knowledge of how to make their initiatives coincide with territorial projects.”
To increase the strength of its position, the Chamber of Commerce of Paris (CCIP) declares that this text does not anticipate the French President’s ambition regarding Greater Paris. You must have discussed this topic with Pierre Simon, President of the CCIP. What is your point of view?
H.N.: “The strength of the draft law is that it succeeds in regionalising the network. In the Île-de-France, as in other regions, there will only be one regional CCI in the context of which territorial CCIs will fully play a role contributing – sometimes decisively in the case of Paris, but not exclusively – towards the definition and implementation of regional Chamber policy. Chamber representatives are above all at the service of companies, and if it so happens that the territorial project of the Île-de-France should make necessary a modification of the organisation of these services, I count on these representatives to offer appropriate responses at the right time.”
Finally, one of the most lively and strongest criticisms of the project lies in how resources will be attributed to Chambers. Your draft remains vague as it simply refers to “resources allocated by finance law”. Many read this as including the network in the State budget, although the professional tax and its additional tax are set to vanish. Can you tell us why the idea of a budgetary allocation has entered the debate?
H.N.: “The expression ‘resources allocated by finance law’ notably designates
all types of tax which might replace the TATP (editorial note: additional tax to the professional tax). Personally, I believe that the public resources of the Chambers of Commerce and Industry should essentially be tax-based: establishing the financing of regional Chambers of Commerce on a grant unrelated to the economic activity of its actors does not endow a sense of responsibility, nor does it legitimise the actions of Chamber representatives in their favour. This issue is currently under discussion with company and Chamber representatives in the more global framework of the reform of the professional tax.”`
We have an increasingly better idea of what guise the tax to substitute professional tax may take. We speak notably of a territorial economic contribution (CET), local activity contribution (CLA) and a complementary contribution (CC), but for the moment, no additional tax for Chambers of Commerce. Catherine Vautrin apparently wishes to support the financing of the Chamber network via the CC (based on added value). Here again, shouldn’t we wait for the fate of the professional tax to be sealed before deepening the debate on Chamber reform?
H.N.: “Quite obviously, the fate of tax will depend on that of the professional tax. This is why the draft law contents itself with foreseeing the possibility of new impositions without any further precisions.”
The text should therefore be put to debate before the National Assembly as of September, then before the Senate. Amendments are likely to be numerous, given that deputies and senators have already made proposals or comments on the subject. What key idea do you wish this draft law to preserve in its ultimate version?
H.N.: “To improve the services rendered to companies, a majority of Chamber
representatives of the two networks, the CCIs and the CMAs, have put forward the regional approach. The government has picked up this key idea in its draft law which essentially defines the architecture of the law, but whose modes of application will be specified, as is the custom, by regulatory power in correlation with the Chamber representatives. The regional scale will not be a rival scale for the territorial scale, nor a mere regulator lacking in good economic sense. Given that the CCI and CMA networks today total over 250 autonomous public establishments, an uncommon situation within the one administration, it is completely legitimate to hand over responsibility to an intermediary scale so that piloting can be more efficient.”
Catherine Vautrin against budget allocation for the CCIs
“It’s hard for me to see how the text (on the reform of Chambers) can be examined before the end of the year, even the start of 2010,” this is what Catherine Vautrin, UMP Deputy for La Marne confided to Commerce International in a telephone conversation in July this year. At that time, the Parliamentary representative, who was, at the end of April, made rapporteur of the draft law relating to the Chamber network, in other words, placed in charge of presenting the draft law, did not dare to hope that the text would be presented to the Ministerial Council before the summer holiday period. She was proven wrong a few days later when the text featured on the Council’s agenda, probably following pressure from Hervé Novelli and the ACFCI (Association of French Chambers of Commerce and Industry). The Deputy of La Marne has had time to take the pulse of CCIs on the subject. She has met with all concerned by the draft law. As for the possible State budget allocation for CCIs, “I will be vigilant about the reform on professional tax as it directly affects the CCIs,” she says. “Moreover, I think that the first thing I will do in relation to this text will have to do with the reform of the professional tax as, personally, I am not at ease with the version of the draft that was transmitted to the State Council. I would like us to keep part of the tax. But in the framework of the reform of the professional tax, we speak of a tax on the added value of companies, and I would part of this tax to go to the Chambers. This is what I am examining at the moment.” With a rapporteur for the draft law on the reform of CCIs fiercely opposed to all inclusion of Chamber networks in the State budget, CCIs have found a precious ally. What remains to be studied and defended now is the scenario of transferring part of the professional tax to a complementary contribution (CC) for companies producing added value (this tax would be imposable from 500,000 euros of turnover upwards, as opposed to 7.6 million euros today). To be continued…
English 
