Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-17-Speech-3-334"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060517.22.3-334"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, we know setting up an internal energy market between the EU and the countries of south-east Europe has advantages for both sides: for the Balkan states it helps establish the reliable energy supply necessary for economic growth, and for us on the EU side it facilitates access to gas resources in the Middle East and around the Caspian Sea, enhancing diversity and security of supply – especially important since the ripples in the pool that were alluded to by Mr Chichester.
However, there have been concerns, and the helpful letter from Commissioner Piebalgs does not entirely answer these. It is not clear whether the ECT states will be signed up to the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. It is not clear whether the internal market will be underpinned by health, safety and employment standards, as it is in the EU. It is not clear whether there will be any control of the demand side of energy, as there is through EU energy efficiency legislation, or whether environmental considerations, such as the control of pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions, have been given adequate attention. There will be no level playing field if these standards are absent.
There is also the question of corruption in the energy sector. To give just one example, in 2005 the British Serious Fraud Office investigated the involvement of a British company in the Serb state power company following allegations that corrupt money was being used to protect war criminals.
Because of all these concerns, it is understandable that the European Parliament should wish to be both informed and consulted in advance of decisions. I regret that Parliament does not yet have codecision in this area and I wish that there was a Constitution in place so that it would have; but it is an outrage that the consultation mechanism could be downgraded.
We welcome the reassurances from Commissioner Piebalgs that he will keep Parliament informed in advance, but we need similar cast-iron reassurances from the Council too. Nevertheless, being informed is not the same as being consulted. Given the serious nature of the questions hanging over the Energy Community Treaty, it would be deeply regrettable if Parliament were sidelined. There could effectively be no democratic oversight of this Treaty, because it is clear – not least from what the Council has said tonight – that the real decisions will be taken by the unelected Permanent High Level Group rather than by ministers themselves."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples