Meeting in Brussels for a mini-plenary session of the European Parliament on Thursday 24 March, MEPs called on the European Commission to start preparing now for a coordinated exit of EU Member States from the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), in the event that the ECT modernisation process does not result in a sufficiently ambitious outcome for the EU. This was put forward in a debate with Commission Executive Vice-President for the Economy, Valdis Dombrovskis, and French Secretary of State for European Affairs, Clément Beaune.
“The European Commission and the Member States must prepare for exiting in a coordinated manner, and an assessment of the impact of the withdrawal must be made in advance: I am asking you, Mr Dombrovskis, to do this. We have got to be prepared for this situation”, said Inma Rodríguez-Piñero (Spain) on behalf of the S&D group.
This request was expressed by representatives of all political groups in the European Parliament except the ECR and the Identity and Democracy Group (no member of the group took part in the debate).
With just over 50 contracting parties, including the EU and all of its Member States (except Italy), the ECT was signed in 1994 with the aim of protecting investments made in the energy sector.
It allows investors to sue Member States who have signed the treaty in private arbitration tribunals if they believe that a government measure endangers their energy investments.
It is currently undergoing a process of modernisation (eleven rounds of negotiations have already taken place) which should lead to the adoption in June this year of a new text better suited to combating climate change.
A premature option, says the Commission
Responding to MEPs’ calls, Mr Dombrovskis did not rule out the possibility of withdrawal. However, he reaffirmed the European Commission’s determination to use the negotiating route to achieve an ambitious revision of the Treaty that is in line with the EU’s climate objectives, not least because of the existence of a special ‘sunset clause’ whereby investors can still take legal action against a Member State that has withdrawn from the ECT for the 20 years following its withdrawal. In his opinion, the question of withdrawal is premature and should only be considered if the EU does not achieve these objectives through negotiations.
Agreeing with the Commission Vice-President, Mr Beaune recommended “giving ourselves a chance regarding the two rounds of negotiations that are still ahead of us” (in April and May) and then “making a real assessment of this modernisation process”.
Somewhat less optimistic were MEPs Anna Cavazzini (Greens/EFA, Germany) and Emmanuel Maurel (The Left, France), who argued that modernising the ECT would inevitably lead to a disappointing outcome, given the lack of progress in the negotiations. Hence why there is a need to get out of it collectively. (Original version in French by Damien Genicot)