Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-11-06-Speech-3-021"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021106.5.3-021"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, at its meeting today the Commission adopted a series of measures which, within the framework of the Euratom Treaty, are aimed at achieving a Community approach to the management of nuclear waste and nuclear safety. This package consists of a communication, a proposal for a directive defining the general principles and obligations in relation to the safety of nuclear installations in the European Union and a proposal for a directive on the management of radioactive waste. The package is supplemented by a draft Council decision authorising the Commission to negotiate an agreement between Euratom and the Russian Federation on the trade in nuclear material.
The second fundamental axis consists of how, once we have these common rules, we will control their effective application. How can we guarantee to all the citizens that the required standards will be complied with in all the nuclear installations of the European Union? Well that is very simple, ladies and gentlemen, there will be two systems. Firstly, control is required of all countries. Independent control authorities already exist. The control of installations will still be a task for the national competent authorities of each and every Member State of the Union. The innovation is that we are establishing a system of auditing crosschecks, promoted and coordinated by the Commission, which will guarantee the appropriate application of the Community rules within the different Member States of the Union.
But, furthermore, the third element of this proposal for a directive is the definition of Community rules for the creation, management and use of funds for dismantling nuclear power stations, with the aim of guaranteeing that the funds are sufficient and available. I would insist that we believe it is essential that these funds are available when they become necessary. We therefore propose a series of elements, but essentially the externalisation of these funds or an equivalent means of guaranteeing their availability to prevent them from, for example, in the event of bankruptcy, being included in the bankrupt assets and therefore not being available for their objective of dismantling the installations when the time comes.
The second directive, ladies and gentlemen, will contribute to the creation of new habits in the management of irradiated fuel and radioactive waste in the Member States of the Union. We are not just talking about highly radioactive waste, about waste from reactors, from nuclear power stations or from reactors used in research, but also about radioactive waste from other types of application such as medical or industrial applications, low intensity waste.
Firstly, we propose a timetable with limit dates so that all the countries of the Union will have appropriate installations prepared and available for the underground storage of high activity waste, because that is currently the safest technology for the storage of that waste. In the case of waste of a lesser intensity, there are other types of storage, but in those cases we also propose the availability and establishment of appropriate locations. In this regard I would like to congratulate, for example, Finland on having already taken decisions with specific and very immediate dates and timetables, which seems to me to be extremely important. I congratulate Finland on the speed of its action. But unfortunately other countries are not in such an advanced situation and we therefore propose a limit date.
We are establishing the possibility that the underground storage of this radioactive waste can be carried out in a manner which involves cooperation between different Member States of the Union. We are therefore confronting this thorny problem once and for all.
Secondly, we believe that this solution, while it is the most suitable today, cannot be considered sufficiently satisfactory and, in this regard, we propose that it is necessary to continue research into the treatment of radioactive waste in order to reduce or possibly even eliminate the existence of this waste.
The final proposal, Mr President, is a draft Council decision allowing the Commission to negotiate an agreement with Russia relating to the trade in nuclear material. This trade has created friction with Russia for some time, for various reasons. Enlargement will mean the incorporation of five new States, with twenty-two reactors, in some cases with early closure scheduled; but, in any event, for some time, these reactors will present us with a problem because the current restrictions, in accordance with the Corfu Agreement, will prevent the supply of fuel for these reactors. In order to deal with this problem we therefore have to negotiate with Russia. All of this must take account of the protection of the European Union companies that carry out enrichment, the protection of consumers, but also the new difficulties the situation may present from the Russian point of view. Furthermore, this may open up the possibility for us – and let us hope this is the case – to be able to demand and promote the speedy closure of the oldest nuclear reactors in Russia, some of which may clearly at some point cause problems and which are very close to us.
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, in conclusion, this package of proposals as a whole is aimed at increasing levels of safety in nuclear power stations and installations within the European Union, which now has fifteen Members, but which will later have twenty-five. Increasing the availability of funds in order to guarantee that when the time comes the dismantling necessary to return sites to their original state can be carried out, in other words, so that those places where there are currently nuclear installations may be totally decontaminated, free of all risk.
We must increase transparency so that the citizens know that, within the European Union, there are a series of rules and levels of security that are guaranteed. And we must confront a thorny problem, the problem of waste, above all high activity waste, but also other waste originating from medical or industrial applications. We must also try to make progress on resolving the issues, difficulties and differences we have with Russia, but which also affect the future Member States of the Union.
I will comment on the reasons for, and the timeliness of, the proposal. Ladies and gentlemen, the broad debate on the Green Paper on the security of the energy supply has highlighted the problem of the security of supply in Europe and the role played by nuclear energy in relation to it and our environmental commitments with regard to greenhouse emissions within the framework of the Kyoto agreements and Protocol.
Furthermore, nuclear energy is currently faced with two challenges, two problems mentioned during this debate: the safety of installations and the treatment of nuclear waste. Despite the fact that the Euratom Treaty provides for important measures guaranteeing a high level of safety, above all with regard to non-proliferation, that is, the appropriate use of fissile material and radioactive material, the current situation is not as ideal as we would like. Firstly, I must point out that in the various States of the Union there is no equivalent application of nuclear safety standards. Secondly, it must be said that, in the negotiations with the candidate countries, we are demanding that the candidate countries comply with certain obligations and behave in a certain way, in the field of nuclear safety, which cannot be compared with anything in the current countries of the Union.
We are therefore faced with a situation in which there are significant disparities within Europe. To a certain extent we are faced with a surprising situation. We may, as I have pointed out on other occasions, have complete and detailed legislation on the quality of bathing water in the European Union but, nevertheless, we do not regulate the levels of security required of nuclear installations within the Union.
But furthermore, as I pointed out, in view of enlargement and the concerns of the European citizens, we must act quickly and decisively. We are creating – and there is no other way of putting it – a situation of asymmetry between the candidate countries and the Member States of the Union.
What is our intention through these proposals? Simply, a new Community vision of nuclear security and the treatment of radioactive waste. The first relates to increasing safety in nuclear power stations and the issue of their dismantling. We are talking about a proposal for a directive that is not yet approved since its legal basis is Article 31 of the Euratom Treaty and that obliges us to submit this text to a committee of experts, consisting of experts from the different countries of the Union; it is still awaiting this procedure, and then the proposal will be approved definitively so that it can be communicated to Parliament and the Council.
Now, the proposal we are presenting today has three fundamental axes. Firstly, it proposes common rules for nuclear safety; secondly, a Community system for controlling the application of these common rules and thirdly, it guarantees the existence and availability of the funds necessary for the dismantling of nuclear installations.
The common rules are based simply on the rules of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the headquarters of which is in Vienna, but our proposal provides for something completely innovative. That is that these rules, which within the framework of the Atomic Energy Agency are simply recommendations, thanks to the proposal for a directive, when they come to be adopted – as I hope they will – will become Community rules, and will therefore be binding on all the countries of the Union, with the legal force that Community law always has.
But furthermore, they are able to evolve and take up the results of the negotiations held over recent years with the candidate countries, negotiations which have allowed these common rules to be developed, which must be complied with, not only by the candidate countries, but also, in the Commission’s opinion, by all the countries of the European Union without exception."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples