Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-04-Speech-2-280"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000704.11.2-280"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I would firstly like to congratulate Mr Mombaur on his report, which I believe broadly coincides with the Commission’s position. Secondly, I would like to thank all the speakers, although I do not agree with everything that has been said.
I consider water to be a form of renewable energy, of course. Hydro-electricity is a form of renewable energy. The problem is that the hydro-electrical industry as a whole is not taken into account when it comes to subsidies, which are another issue. We believe that we have to support renewable energy sources as much as possible. This is an extremely important European technology, with industrial possibilities beyond our European borders, which we must continue to support. The Directive excludes hydroelectricity from the consideration of subsidies, which means that it is not sustainable. We must continue to include it within the broad consideration of renewable energy resources.
Mr President, I do not have time to expand further. I would like to thank Mr Mombaur once again for his magnificent report and point out that we are going to present proposals in order to continue the progress in the field of liberalisation. We are going to deal with the social aspects of the electricity sector and its public service element. The assessment is frankly positive and we must continue to make progress in accordance with what the Council has told us, at both the Lisbon and the Feira Summits.
In any event, I would like to point out that I agree with Mr Mombaur when he says that the liberalisation of the electrical sector has led to a drop in prices, improvements for customers, for homes and also for large industry, which means job creation, increased competitivity of the European electrical industry, development and work, although it is true that some jobs have been lost in the electrical industry. However, the benefits have outweighed the problems encountered.
It should also be pointed out that the Lisbon and Feira Summits have reiterated the need to move ahead with liberalisations. As regards what some have said, it is true that there is no timetable. This does not mean that there is not a strong will to move forward.
In any event, the progress made so far – which is very considerable – still seems to me to be insufficient. We must not create fifteen separate liberalised markets, but one single European liberalised market. To this end, there are still issues to be dealt with, such as the level of openness of the market, the separation of the operators of transmission networks from the production systems, the guarantee of non-discriminatory access in the application of prices. In this context, I would like to thank Mr Mombaur for his resolution’s support for the importance of the separation of producers and operators of transmission networks.
Furthermore, the efforts of the Florence Forum are invaluable and we must continue along that route. If they turn out to be insufficient, they will be supplemented with Commission initiatives. In that respect, there is a will to seek an establishment of tariffs which will lead to an increase in exchanges and clear access to the network.
I must also point out that the Florence Forum – with regard to electricity – must be supplemented by the Madrid Forum on gas. Both of these reflect an original institutional approach, since representatives of Parliament participate in them.
There is a physical aspect, the capacity for interconnection, which must also be developed and which currently lead to limitations in the development of this single market, both in the electrical sector and in the gas sector.
If we are to continue to make progress with liberalisation, we cannot forget one key element: the public service role of electricity – and gas as well, although on a different level. This means that the supply must be guaranteed – as some of you have said – and there must be an adequate service for all citizens. This aspect will be included in the initiatives which I propose to present to the Council and Parliament at the end of this year, so that they may be ready in the Spring, for the European Council, in order to provide more impetus for liberalisation in the areas I have mentioned.
I also wish to say that the aspects relating to safety standards must also be developed soon and I am going to propose to Parliament and the Council that we hold a debate, not on the nuclear sector, nor on the coal or renewable energy sector, but on the guarantees of the European Union’s energy supply as a whole, when we will be able to consider the different sources of energy and the problems relating to each of them, because nothing is free, everything has its price, its pros and cons. We need to hold a reasoned debate on the possibilities available to us, in terms of sources and the guarantees of supply, in the light of the Kyoto commitments."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples