Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-17-Speech-3-342"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060517.22.3-342"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it has already been expressed in the course of this debate that the Treaty establishing the Energy Community has historic significance and, from the point of view of its benefits, is not a one-way street.
It is not the case that we are handing these countries something on a plate, as it were – as the EU, too, benefits. As Mr Buzek and others have also said, an important point is that this is a pan-European issue rather than one that concerns only the countries of South-East Europe or only the EU – an integrated energy market certainly could not function like this. This Treaty contributes not only to energy security and energy supply but, generally, to increased stability in Europe. As you know, the Austrian Presidency, in particular, has attempted in recent months to step up cooperation with the countries of South-East Europe and of the Western Balkans, to make some progress in the interests of stability and peace in Europe.
It is potentially very interesting to recall that the Energy Community Treaty was consciously modelled on the European Coal and Steel Community – which, as you know, was the genesis for the European Union. Members such as Mr Paasilinna have also mentioned here that the Energy Community Treaty enables the very local and specific energy and environmental concerns of South-East Europe to be addressed. A number of speakers have raised environmental concerns, such as increased mortality rates from winter cold, environmental degradation as a result of emissions from old power stations, the use of wood for domestic heating that results in deforestation, and the unsustainable use of wetlands and watercourses for hydroelectric power.
As has also been mentioned in the course of the debate, it is in Europe’s interests to think beyond the South-East European region – an example given here was the Caspian Sea. I should like to mention in this connection that the Presidency sent a Troika mission to Kazakhstan to meet representatives of all the Central Asian countries, and also sent a mission to the Southern Caucasus. Naturally, the energy issue – both the producer and the transit-country aspects – is particularly important in both of these regions. Other points raised here have concerned Nabucco, for example: this is another important project that will benefit the security of Europe’s energy supply.
Doubts have been expressed, too, and that is reasonable, of course – but I believe that the issue of this Treaty must be seen in conjunction with the overall endeavours of the EU as regards this region of South-East Europe. I should like to remind the House that all the countries who are party to this Treaty are involved in the stabilisation and association process, which, of course, also comprises respect for human rights, fundamental rights and other EU provisions. Indeed, the purpose of the network of agreements we have made with South-East Europe is to introduce these countries to EU values, too, which naturally includes the values enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
That is why I believe that the Energy Community is a unique achievement, a successful project, one that we wish to remain successful. I have also sensed that in most of your speeches. Furthermore, there is no doubt that Europe must speak with one voice to third countries on energy policy, and that the process of integrating our neighbouring countries into the European single market should be continued. As I said in my introductory speech, I wish to make it crystal clear that Parliament naturally has a central, an important role to play in this, and that there can be no question of the Council’s attempting to curtail Parliament’s rights – which we could not do anyway, owing to the interinstitutional structure; on the contrary, we have an active interest in due involvement by, and joint action with, Parliament. That is why we shall be involving Parliament in all the important issues regarding the Energy Community: in accordance with the EC Treaty, but also, as I have said, taking a very broad interpretation of its provisions. In addition, Parliament will always be fully informed of developments."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples