Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-02-Speech-2-197"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011002.8.2-197"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr Miller, I can answer your first question with a definite ‘no’, which seems to be what you desire. The European Union's stance on this issue will not change.
The situation as regards the second question is as follows: an international fund for the decommissioning of Block 1 of the plant was created. The fund is managed by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and, to date, EUR 220 million have been made available for it. These EUR 220 million I mentioned were the result of an international conference of donors which I convened jointly with the Lithuanian Prime Minister last year in Vilnius. I must however add – and this clouds the picture a little – that EUR 165 million of this sum comes from our own budget, so that the amount that the international community was prepared to raise in addition looks modest in comparison. Nonetheless, the funds available suffice to start on the shutting-down process as planned and to finance all the tasks connected with it.
I must draw it to your attention that the shutdown of such a nuclear power plant is a project lasting decades and the financial obligations resulting from it for us will last for the same period of time.
The situation with regard to the plant's Block II is rather more complicated because the Lithuanian parliament has not to date fixed a definite date for it to be shut down. During the discussions I have mentioned, I have however informed the Lithuanian government that the Commission is of course prepared to provide the necessary help in this aspect too, and is moreover willing to organise international aid. A country like Lithuania can quite clearly not manage the huge task of shutting down a power plant like this one by its own resources alone. It would, by the way, also be quite unfair to demand that of them, for it was not Lithuania that wanted the plant. On the contrary, the Lithuanians even resisted it at the time. It was the former Soviet Union that built this plant on the spot where it stands today, and certainly not in order to provide Lithuania with electricity, but, in the main – we believe – for military purposes. It is, then, part of the legacy of the former Soviet Union, burdening a poor country like Lithuania. It is in our interest that this legacy should disappear."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples