Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-10-25-Speech-3-059"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20061025.4.3-059"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, in Lahti, an important step was taken in energy policy, but in my view it was not a milestone. It would perhaps be wiser for us in European politics not always to bandy about grand speeches and then disappoint the people when we do not get results. I find Mr Barroso's proposal to undertake realistic projects and implement them bit by bit much more intelligent.
There has been an important development in energy policy on the subject of security of supply. First of all, the subject of security of supply has come to the forefront of energy policy, and has, I hope, perhaps helped us here in Parliament to stop discussing energy policy only from the point of view of climate policy.
Security of supply is a high priority. At least since the developments in Ukraine – since it became clear that Russia and President Putin are using energy policy as a political tool – we are all surely a bit more prepared, as was evident in Lahti to a certain extent, to take this issue more seriously. This is not just talk – there has clearly been a change in Russia. Anyone who takes Mr Putin seriously – and we must do so – must address these positions. There is also the fact that we are taken more seriously when we act together. To that extent, Lahti was a success, because we spoke with one voice. The next step would be for us to push harder for Europe to be given competences in the field of energy policy. Thirdly, we must be more consistent in the specific actions we undertake.
Security of supply has a foreign policy aspect, but also involves strengthening the industries involved in it. We must examine more closely whether our rules, regulations and inspections are really ensuring security of supply, or actually producing uncertainty. Those who negotiate for us, those who buy energy out in the real world, need to invest, and businesses only invest when there is a reasonable degree of certainty.
Last but not least, security of supply also requires a variety of energy sources. It would be idiocy to rule out nuclear power: it would do security of supply a serious disservice."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples