Overall it was virtually in a 1 consensus

Energy news: what memories keep parliamentary debates on the Act of nationalization of the electricity and gas from the 8avril 1946

PatriceBougrain-Dubourg: we derived most of the maquis and the free French. It is part of our ideal of having national societies, and de Gaulle was very attached. It was he who asked that these laws on nationalization is priority. The regional companies were not in favour because they had energy installations and wanted to keep them. Then, their owners were trying by all possible means to prevent the nationalization and they held us dramas to which would be if it voted the text. But the atmosphere of the time, many of them having been somewhat compromised with Pétain, they did not have much to say. And finally, it has not been very fierce debates. Overall, it was virtually in a (1) consensus.

E.n.: There was even the atmosphere in the Chamber, each accusing 200 families, the other denouncing the despoliation of 1.5 million small shareholders (2)!

P .B - D. : But, it was at the time, it was part of the rule of the game, it was nothing extraordinary, it was all the time! You know, there was a considerable number of Communist members who sought to make the Act to establish the class struggle.

E.n.: Yourself, why did you vote against the text

P .B - D. : Is the despoliation of the small shareholders who dérangeait me. Nationalizing it without practically compensate those that suffer the consequencesin lots of areas, dams were built on private funds and lost their owners at the time both their installation and their position in being replaced by officials. It was quite scandalous. But I was not against the principle itself of nationalization. It should be. At the time, 60 of the French were without a roof, without electricity, without water. Bridges had jumped - very often, however, they were used to transport electricity-, pipes had broken, need to see in what condition it was!

E.n.: However there was more virulent than you, more ideological opponents...

P .B - D. : It was indeed anti-gaullistes, ultras right that opposed any reform. There was home of the reeks, not necessarily Pétain, but the mentality, Pétain Psychology: work, family, homeland; Marshal here us. There was no possible discussion with them. They were against consumerism.

1. The draft law on the nationalisation of the electricity and gas was approved by 490 votes for and there were 60 votes against.

2 See pp. 4-5.

BOX .

Bury the Act of 1946

Articles 5 and 23 of the Act of 8 April 1946 (1) (amended by the Act of 9 August 2004) (2) will be at the heart of the discussions on the likely future legislation to allow the privatization of gas of France. In debate: the common distribution service EDF - gas France and the majority public status of the DNN (see pp. 8-9).

The common distribution France EDF - gas service

"France electricity and gas of France can, by agreement, create common services with or without legal personality." The creation of a common service is mandatory in the distribution sector, for the construction of the works, control of work implementation, operation and maintenance of networks, counting as well as operations of other missions related to these activities (...) "(Article 5)

Non-nationalized distributors (DNN)

"Distribution to mixed-economy companies in which the State or public authorities have the majority, the boards or similar services consisting of local communities are kept in their current situation, the status of these companies will always maintain the particular character that gave them birth according to the laws and decrees in force or future." (Article 23)

1 - Act of 8 April 1946 on the nationalization of the electricity and gas.

2 - Law of 9 August 2004 concerning the public service of electricity and gas and electric and gas companies.