The Minister made this statement in response to an enquiry by our colleagues from RTL.lu.
Felicie Weycker, a senior civil servant at the Ministry of Mobility, recently took over the position as chair of the board of directors of Lux-Airport. Lux-Airport SA is entirely owned by the state, and its board of directors makes strategic choices about the airport’s future.
The Minister emphasises in his response that Felicie Weycker cannot make decisions on her own in her current position. Furthermore, these decisions have no impact on the airport’s everyday operations and hence have no bearing on the work of her partner, Luxair CEO Gilles Feith.
According to Bausch, because the board of directors is not in charge of the airport’s operations, none of its choices would benefit or disadvantage Luxair. He also notes that European airports are very strictly regulated.
However, it is “self-evident” that competent civil servants serve on Boards of Directors, where they represent the interests of the state, Bausch says.
It is indeed common practice for ministry representatives to serve on boards of directors, especially if the government owns stock in a company.
According to the Minister, there cannot be a conflict of interest between the interests of a corporation and one of its shareholders, in this case the state.
Another example of this is Tom Weisgerber. The senior policy adviser at the Ministry of Mobility recently took over as chairman of the board of directors at Cargolux.
The Minister stresses that the law clearly states how a corporate manager must act, first and foremost in the best interests of the company. Tom Weisgerber also has to adhere to these rules, says Bausch, who sees no conflict of interest in this case either.
The Minister further emphasises that Weisgerber was nominated by both the government and Cargolux’s private shareholders. Bausch partially credits Weisgerber’s “good work” for the Luxembourgish air freight carrier’s positive development over the last ten years. For this reason, Bausch says that he “doesn’t really understand” why the issue of a conflict of interest is being raised in the first place, given the excellent performance of the company.
