The bankruptcy of the Hamon company – specializing in industrial cooling – several weeks ago bothers the majority in place in Wallonia (PS-MR-Écolo). This is at least what we see when this question is addressed in the Commission for the Economy of the Walloon Parliament, where the opposition (Les Engagés and the PTB) are asking for the establishment of a special commission. Why ? Because in view of the sums invested (just over 100 million euros) in this company in twenty years, via Sogepa, we are entitled to wonder if all the operations have been carried out according to the rules .
So far, the majority refuses to set up this commission. It also refuses to proceed with the hearings of various actors in this case in order to clarify the few gray areas. What are they ?
The first concerns the chairman of the board of directors of Sogepa, Laurent Levaux, who also sat, as an independent, on the board of directors of Hamon, where he therefore did not represent Sogepa. These roles were played by Renaud Witmeur (president at the time of the management committee of Sogepa) and Valérie Potier.
For André Antoine, deputy of the Committed (ex-CDH), “we must not exclude a potential conflict of interest in the head of Laurent Levaux who sits in the two structures”. Did he push Sogepa to invest in a collapsing company? If we follow this lead, we have to wonder where Laurent Levaux’s interest is in supporting Hamon and, there, things get complicated. Is he a Hamon shareholder? No. Does he get paid? Yes, as an administrator, he receives compensation. “The remuneration of Laurent Levaux, in his capacity as independent director of Hamon, was 20,500 euros in 2019 and 19,000 euros in 2020, as mentioned in the remuneration reports for the 2019 and 2020 financial years of Hamon”, explains MP André Antoine. It should be noted that the mandates of Laurent Levaux were obviously known to everyone (at Sogepa, as well as in the Walloon government) and in particular the FSMA which controls the Belgian financial sector. If there was a conflict of interest, why didn’t anyone react?
Above all, the Engagés consider that in other cases, Laurent Levaux “seems to find itself in a critical situation when it comes to managing possible conflicts of interest”, explains André Antoine. The latter takes as an example the fact that Laurent Levaux is also chairman of the board of directors of Nethys (whose subsidiary NEB holds the majority of shares in Liège Airport) and of the company Aviapartner. This situation, pinpointed by The evening in October 2019, highlighted the fact that Aviapartner, an airport ground services company, “has been in dispute with the airport for several years”. However, there is no evidence that Laurent Levaux used this dual position to influence this situation.
No government waivers
A second aspect of the Hamon file deserves some answers from the majority. Namely, the remuneration of the last CEO of the company, Fabrice Orban. The Engaged evoke, on the basis of the remuneration reports, “an amount of 380,000 euros and a signing bonus of 60,000 euros”. However, Hamon being majority-owned by a public structure, the Committed consider that the remuneration should have been subject to the ceiling provided for by the decree of March 29, 2018. “A derogation is however possibleexplains André Antoine, either because the regional participation is only temporary or because a derogation is granted by the Walloon government.” The Walloon MP considers that if we refer to an activity report from Sogepa (2019), Sogepa’s participation in Hamon has a long-term aim. Moreover, he insists, “the Walloon government did not grant him an exemption”.
A final point is also put forward by the Engagés, who wonder if the “last aid of 20 million euros granted by Sogepa to the Hamon company might not be considered as State aid, which is not accepted by the European Union”. André Antoine considers that the absence of a private investor alongside the public, to help Hamon one last time, goes in this direction. “The fact that a private investor would probably not have risked such an operation, and would not have supported the public authorities financially to share the risks with them, indicates that this intervention by Sogepa risks being reclassified as state aid.” The Engaged therefore request an analysis by the Court of Auditors. It should be noted that, in the past, private investors have intervened. The Engagés hope that these last two elements will encourage the majority to set up a special commission.
