Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-17-Speech-3-343"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060517.22.3-343"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, I shall try to address some of the issues touched upon during the debate about the new countries that could join the Community in the years to come.
I really believe that Turkey is close to joining the Community. It has been working towards this since the creation of the Community. It has not signed up to it, but we shall continue to work with it. It is quite important for Turkey as a candidate country – we have started negotiations with it and it is also a very important transit country – that it could and should sign this Treaty. Two countries – Ukraine and Moldova – have also expressed interest in joining.
The issue of affordability is very important because energy prices should be accessible to the citizens of these countries. Article 33 of Chapter IV addresses this issue as far as the Community can address it. In the process of creating the Community we have devoted attention to social issues. I agree that the social approach in Europe should definitely be directed more closely at countries that aspire to a vision that may one day come much closer to that of the European Union. A memorandum of understanding is a good first step in that direction.
We have looked carefully at renewables and energy efficiency: Chapter VI addresses this issue. On Kyoto, Article 13 in Chapter III – even if it does not say very much – covers this and the provisions on renewables and energy efficiency in the Treaty will definitely help to achieve the Kyoto goals.
Concerning privatisation, the Community does not impose any type of action in this area: any decision on privatisation will be taken by these countries’ governments.
Concerning prices, I think these countries are already paying extremely high prices for energy. An Energy Community could bring down prices because of the new investments it will bring in. It will also help with regard to collecting payments, because there is a lot of money owed. There is also diversification: these regions pay some of the highest gas prices to the supplier. The supplier in these regions does not worry too much about price affordability. This means that the Energy Community could bring much more stability – at least to prices – and could even reduce prices for consumers. In addition, an
brings public service obligations, which means addressing issues for the more vulnerable people in society.
Investments from the World Bank – the EIB is also very active in this region – and other investors will come as soon as the Treaty is approved and ratified.
I think there has been some misunderstanding about foreign policy. This Treaty does not address that issue at all. The Treaty states that in some cases when energy is bought from third countries, the Energy Community could apply some restrictions if these countries neglect the environment or social issues. This provides an opportunity. This Treaty in no way restricts the powers of the countries that participate in the Treaty to take independent foreign policy decisions. It is very fair to look at these issues, because we cannot afford, if we want to promote sustainability, to buy energy from a third country where environmental standards are neglected and, as a result, the price of energy resources is perhaps cheaper. So I think there has been some misunderstanding.
I really believe that this Treaty serves the interests of the region and of the European Community and I really hope that the countries that participate in this Community will benefit greatly from it."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples