Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-18-Speech-3-141"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030618.10.3-141"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, no country has been able to reduce poverty without a significant increase in energy use. Access to modern energy varies considerably, however. More than two billion people in the world do not have access to electricity or fuels and are reduced to using firewood and animal droppings for their energy needs.
I do not have time to discuss further specific proposals and comments. I just want to sum up by saying that the Commission’s proposals are, by and large, encouraging. If they are to be more than empty words, significant resources must, however, be contributed in order to stimulate investments in new and environmentally friendly technology – investments that are often rather expensive initially but that are cheaper over the projects’ total life-cycle. Moreover, efforts at village level, where the majority of the poor live, must be clearly prioritised. It is there that the need for resources in terms of aid is at its greatest.
I hope that Parliament will support my report and that the Commission will bear in mind our amendments, above all those concerning the demand for significantly increased financial resources. We must ensure that these sound proposals are more than just empty rhetoric.
To mention just a few examples: cooking with poorly vented stoves has a significant impact upon health; hundreds of millions of women and children spend several hours a day gathering firewood for household needs; lack of electricity means inadequate lighting, limited communications and no access to refrigeration and to a host of labour-saving devices and income-generating opportunities. Modern energy services for these poor countries are therefore a crucial prerequisite for its being possible to eradicate poverty in these countries and for the latter being able to achieve what are termed the Millennium Development Goals.
Most current forms of energy create environmental problems at local, regional and international levels that threaten both the present and future generations’ health and prosperity. To find new ways of increasing energy services for the poor, at the same time as taking increased account of the environmental effects of energy use is one of our most important challenges.
Despite the primary significance of the energy supply for development and growth, energy issues have, in general, been missing from the international development agenda and from the work done to combat poverty. For example, energy projects have accounted for less than 5% of EU aid since 1990.
Last year in Johannesburg, something of a breakthrough occurred, and both energy initiatives launched by the Commission are more than welcome. Both the statement we are debating today and the EU’s energy initiatives in Johannesburg underline the crucial importance of energy in the fight against poverty.
A proper model is provided in terms of the general trend of the measures proposed, that is to say support for capacity-building, reform of the energy sector, management of the demand side, diversification of supply and the development of suitable regulations, financial mechanisms and public-private partnerships.
Both initiatives suffer, however, from a number of limitations and shortcomings. In view of the huge challenges ahead, the proposals are not ambitious enough. No new financial resources are proposed. No doubt, the majority of the investments on the energy side will have to come from private sources, but there is also a tremendous need for resources in terms of aid. Otherwise, there is little hope of reaching the poor in rural areas. Moreover, the necessary transition to renewable energy and more efficient energy use can only happen with the help of specific financial support to help cover the higher up-front investments. We therefore propose in this report that a special Sustainable Energy Fund be set up, rather as the Commission has now set up a fund, worth EUR 1 billion, for efforts in the area of water.
Another problem is that no clear distinction is made between the requirements in terms of policy development and investments, on the one hand at village level and on the other hand in the modern sector. The village level needs to be clearly specified and prioritised.
Most of the oil imported by developing countries is used for transportation. The Commission’s statement makes hardly any reference to the transport sector. There are examples – especially from Latin America in the form, for example, of the ethanol program in Brazil – of how, through practical efforts, it is in actual fact possible to bring about environmentally friendly development in the transport area."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples