Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-07-08-Speech-2-034"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080708.4.2-034"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would like to start with thanks, which are directed towards the author of this report, Chairman Marcin Libicki. He prepared this report under exceptionally difficult circumstances, as he had to face unusually powerful lobbying from the representatives of the consortium responsible for constructing this controversial project. I hope that the final version of this report will show that the times when lobbying groups had a significant influence on the laws passed by the European Union is a thing of the past.
Next, considering the merits of the case, I would like to emphasise that, in examining projects that directly affect its members, the European Union should apply objective environmental protection standards. Today’s report is a test of that objectivity. The Nord Stream project will, as we all well know, have a disastrous impact on the natural environment of the Baltic Sea. We cannot allow such a dangerous investment to take place within the European Union without the agreement of a quarter of its inhabitants. Our objective should be to reach a consensus, not to have an environmentally dangerous and economically questionable project forced through by a giant power company.
The northern gas pipeline is uneconomical: it is over 30 times more expensive than construction over land. According to the latest estimates, the project will cost between EUR 10 billion and EUR 20 billion. An alternative land pipeline would cost about EUR 3 billion. This means that the gas sent will have to cost much more, which will bring about an immediate rise in the cost of gas imports for the whole of the European Union.
A second point of this unusually controversial project is the European Union’s energy security. The Nord Stream construction project will have a drastic impact on this security. In response to Russia’s actions, the European Union should expand Member States’ access to gas and oil resources in Central Asia instead of making us even more dependent on gas supplies from Gazprom, as is happening at present. The Kremlin’s activities are aimed at preventing diversification of gas supplies in Europe and Nord Stream provides the perfect way to fulfil this objective. As I have said earlier, this is a project with absolutely no economic justification.
The Nord Stream project demonstrates the Kremlin’s capability to monopolise the market for gas in Europe. At the same time, the problems with the European Nabucco project provide an example of the Union’s failure to guarantee its own energy security. At this point the question arises: why is it that Germany, a country that not so long ago was a fervent supporter of freedom and security in the former Eastern Bloc countries, is now putting these countries at risk of another loss of sovereignty? By supporting the plans of the Kremlin, which is aimed at overall energy domination in Western Europe, Germany is putting these countries at risk of Russian political blackmail.
I am calling on all parliamentary groups to support today’s report so as to avert an enormous ecological disaster and to respect the right of all countries lying on the Baltic to give or withdraw their agreement to this type of investment. What the European Union needs at this time is solidarity in all aspects, both as regards energy security and as regards environmental protection."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples