Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-22-Speech-1-095"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030922.6.1-095"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, nobody denies the fact that, given the EU’s considerable dependence where the provisioning of natural oil products is concerned, initiatives must be taken to guarantee the continuity of supply of these products. Indeed, in this respect, the Commission proposes a number of measures that guarantee a continuous supply of natural gas, but one is right in questioning, as many of my fellow MEPs have done before me, whether the intended goal can be achieved with these measures. I do not, in any event, support the most essential measures from the Commission proposal, which I will list below.
The first measure concerns the increase of the level of stocks from 90 to 120 days. Why would the European Union increase its stocks when the International Energy Agency has a global emergency response mechanism at its disposal? Furthermore, the increase in stocks entails considerable expenses, including the construction of storage facilities. Needless to say, this would also result in a huge burden on the environment, and costs would undoubtedly be passed on to the consumer.
In addition, the Commission wants to set up a public body for sustaining natural oil supplies. This body would be responsible for at least two thirds of the required stock levels. It would, in my view, take more than setting up a new body. It appears paramount to me that a sound political relationship should be established with the natural oil producing countries.
Finally, the proposal also seeks to use market intervention to curb price fluctuations, so that the Commission would henceforth be able to release stocks in the case of expected physical interruptions in supply. This, to my mind, serves no purpose whatsoever. When you know that even the OPEC countries do not manage to maintain the desired price level, this measure can only be described as wishful thinking on the part of the European Union.
Finally, I should like to remark that the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, together with the rapporteur, has worked very hard on reaching an acceptable and realistic compromise. Despite this, it seems more helpful to me to withdraw the proposal. The discussion could then be re-opened on the basis of the many well-founded observations that have been made in Parliament."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples