Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-24-Speech-4-029"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021024.3.4-029"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the particular importance of this report is clearly apparent right from the Commissioner’s introductory explanatory comments. As a result of congestion and insufficient joint activity, certain Member States can now only profit to a limited extent from the advantages of the open markets, meaning that competitive advantages for consumers are becoming increasingly smaller. The European Commission is therefore right to propose a reform of the guidelines for Trans-European Networks in the energy sector.
The revised proposal takes account of the liberalisation of the energy markets, the increasing external dependence on energy and the stricter requirements to get sustainable sources of energy accepted. These are the objectives which have been emphasised by the political leaders on the European Councils of Stockholm and Barcelona. Concentration on a new list of priority projects forms the core of this proposal. Member States will give special support and attention to these projects. The maximum percentage for co-financing will be increased from 10% to 20% and from now on the construction phase will take precedence.
The question which immediately comes to mind is whether this is the best solution. In my opinion, a massive subsidy for the energy sector is not a good solution because I feel that it is at variance with the current trend towards liberalisation and the creation of a competitive internal market. It must be emphasised that the main responsibility lies with the energy sector and with the industry itself. Measures which are taken on the basis of this decision may in no way be allowed to cause disruption of competitive practices within the internal energy market. I also feel that Community aid should only relate to the design phase. Subsidies for the construction phase such as proposed by the Commission should then only be granted in exceptional cases. In this context, the integration of renewable energy sources constitutes an important factor. In my opinion, these will contribute in future to the diversification of energy sources and thus as such to the continuity of energy provision within the European Union. Support of tangible projects such as off-shore wind parks should therefore be encouraged.
The way in which the Commission wants to implement all this does give rise to a number of questions. I think it is not a good idea to give the European Parliament a
only when the issues concern strategically important changes to project specifications. It is important to seek a balance between, on the one hand, a quick reaction by the Commission to new developments and, on the other hand, the need for effective control by Parliament. To satisfy the need for transparency, the Commission needs to submit regular reports.
Finally I would like to emphasise that actual measures will be necessary if we want to reap the rewards of the internal market. In fact, the new guidelines might significantly contribute towards coping with the problems of: the continuity of energy provision, the integration of renewable energy, the outermost regions as well as enlargement. I would like to clearly point out that Community aid must be applied pragmatically and that, in the first instance, accountability must be given to the energy sector itself."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples