Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-01-14-Speech-3-385"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090114.17.3-385"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, firstly let me offer my apologies to you. I am here for the first time and perhaps I spent so long on the introduction that I contributed to the delay. But I think this summary of how we have been acting since the early morning of 1 January was worthwhile.
Last, but not least, I agree with most of you who were arguing for the need for a more strategic approach, the need for medium- and long-term solutions – this is exactly what the Czech presidency is planning to do. We have the six months – and we have perhaps four months to work with you on it – but we are in complete agreement with the Commission and Member States to move the agenda forward in order to make this a key item for the March European Council and, of course, also to organise in May the Southern Corridor Summit in order to promote the diversification of the supplies such as the Nabucco project and others.
Speaking with one voice is exactly what we are trying to do in this adventure. I think we are quite successful in doing that for the time being.
You mentioned the internal energy package. This is not a subject of the current debate; we are discussing the emergency situation. But I can tell you that, from what I know of the discussion in the Council, the various fears about going for complete unbundling were simply motivated by strategic concerns in some countries. This is the debate about a third-country clause etc. However, I mentioned in my statement here that the Czech presidency takes this as one of its priorities, and we will do whatever we can to find a solution and compromise between the Council and Parliament.
But do not expect that it will bring us a miraculous solution like in those kinds of gas games in central and eastern Europe. It is different from being on an island, where you have the freedom to bring energy into any port you wish, as opposed to being located somewhere like Slovakia or Bulgaria. Yes, you are right that there are countries which are better equipped, even in that particular region, for that kind of emergency situation. However, I think we should also be aware of the fact that, for example, you cannot build gas storage facilities wherever you want. You need the right kind of a geological environment.
For example, we are fortunate in my country that all storage facilities are located in the eastern part of the country. We can pump from those storages and distribute gas even if there is almost no supply from outside. We are able to survive for a few weeks or months, but no longer. On the other hand, Slovakia unfortunately has those geological positions in the western part of the country and to reverse the flow is not an easy operation. You need to have the compressors on the pipelines and, if you do not, then it causes trouble.
To those who argue that this is a political problem: concerning speaking with one voice, I can tell you from all my experience that of course it is a political problem. It is a political problem because people are freezing so it is a politically difficult situation. Of course I agree with those, like Jacek Saryusz-Wolski or István Szent-Iványi, who argue that this is a kind of cynical game and, in fact, at the heart of this is the fight about who is going to control the infrastructure in the country in question. Others, like Hannes Swoboda and Jan Marinus Wiersma, stress that we should not take a black-and-white approach to this and that Ukraine deserves some attention – you are also right: of course Ukraine is not making this easier. That is, at least, my own view. But then we should be aware of the fact that Bulgaria and Slovakia are in a terrible situation, because suddenly there is a country that wants to exploit this difficult situation and to put those countries into conflict with Ukraine. That is what we can see right now, from the developments today, for example. So it is difficult – what can we do?
Then there are those who are afraid to enter into the game at all because they view it as being like the card game
with the danger that whoever ends up with the black card will foot the bill. I do not think that the one who is afraid to play is courageous. I think a courageous person is one is willing to take a risk.
Why not buy gas on the Ukrainian-Russian border? An excellent example! We have discussed this, but who are the contractors on the EU side? They are private companies who are afraid because they do not have control over the gas coming in. There obviously should be a solution but that would require the willingness of Ukraine to give up a stake in the pipeline. As you know, their Parliament prohibits that and they are not ready to do it. European companies should take a certain role, and there is nothing that can be done in a matter of weeks or even months. So we need to step up the pressure. But today, for example, we said that legal action must follow here. I think this is important on both sides.
I do not want to repeat myself and again take longer than I should. I want to thank you above all for your interest and your active attitude – from Jacek Saryusz-Wolski, the PPE-DE Group, to all of you here. We need your help and your attention. We need your help in drawing attention to this issue to those in European countries where this is not a problem on the front pages. That is mostly in this part of Europe, where there is no emergency situation. That would help us to speak with one voice in a more active way."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples