Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-02-14-Speech-2-284"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060214.27.2-284"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, thankfully our economy and our gross domestic product are much less sensitive to fluctuations in energy prices than they were in 1973/74. The OECD and the European Commission both estimate that this vulnerability, this sensitivity has reduced by about half, precisely because our management and production are now much more energy-efficient. However, that does not of course mean that, even today, we can easily cope with an increase in the oil price from USD 30 to USD 60 just like that; and there are voices – which I hope will never be proved right – predicting three-figure prices in the near future.
With respect to gas, it must be said, to be fair to our Russian friends, that their intention was to get Ukraine to pay the world market price, although the world market price is a relative term, so it would be better to say the standard price in Europe, of about USD 220 per thousand cubic metres. This was ultimately agreed in the night from 3 to 4 January in the negotiations between Gazprom and Ukraine. The compromise provides – and the contracts have now been drawn up and signed – that a mixture will be produced of Russian gas at about USD 220 and much cheaper gas from Central Asia, and Ukraine will pay about USD 95 for that mixture.
With regard to world market prices and European gas prices, you should be aware that the US buys its gas at a much higher price than we do in Europe. We obviously do not yet have a standard world market price – the differences for gas are considerably greater than they are for oil. That, in turn, is an argument in favour of a more long-term approach to energy policy and in favour of increased partnership. This dialogue between the European Union and Russia on one side, and OPEC on the other, must be continued and strengthened. A greater degree of transparency is desirable in this connection, to build trust in both groups of partners.
I would also very much recommend that we pay greater attention not only to working with the energy producers, but also to establishing dialogue with consumers. It is important for us in Europe to reach agreements with Japan, the US, and similarly with other consumers, to achieve a goal for which the oil-producing countries are also aiming: stable long-term prices. It is quite incorrect to believe that it is in the primary interest of the OPEC countries to reach a price of USD 100 as soon as possible. They are well aware, firstly, that it would not last long and that market mechanisms could then reduce the price to a relatively low level. They are also well aware that the functioning of our economy, and continual growth, are ultimately important for their oil and gas sales, too.
There is therefore a common interest in creating stable, reliable energy markets and guaranteeing secure supplies and stable prices. We will be able to make good progress in this over the coming months. The Green Paper that the Commission is currently discussing is not yet officially referred to as such, but in practice it is one. It will in future be a guiding principle for us."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples