Brussels, 21/09/2007 (Agence Europe) - As indicated earlier (EUROPE 9505-9506), co-decision examination of the 3rd legislative package on the internal energy market points to there being tough negotiation at the European Parliament and EU Council, as well as between the two institutions. The political groups expressed mixed reactions in response to the proposals tabled by the Commission on Wednesday 19 September.
Speaking on behalf of the EPP-ED, Giles Chichester of the UK expressed his group's support for the new Commission package describing it as “a decisive and hopefully final step in the direction of full liberalisation of the gas and electricity markets”. Recalling that “Parliament gave a decisive vote of support” to Commissioner Andris Piebalgs when it adopted the Vidal Quadras report in July, Giles Chichester nonetheless avoided mentioning the question of effective unbundling between production/distribution activities and transport in his press release. This shows that the ownership unbundling option does not have unanimity at the EPP-ED, depending on whether one is of French or British nationality.
Graham Watson of Britain, President of the Liberal Group (ALDE), broke no bones about dealing with this thorny issue. In his view, the “effective separation of service providers and network operators has brought considerable benefits by enabling new market entrants to participate on an equal basis with existing monopolies, which has improved consumer choice and the quality of service to the consumer”. He said: “This is the goal we aspire to in raising the competitiveness of the market in energy. Effective unbundling - whether full structural separation or via independent systems operators - is essential to ensure full transparency of information and non-discriminatory access”. Anne Lapperrouze, who recently expressed reticence about ownership unbundling, simply stressed that the EP has a “decisive part” to play, saying in a press release: “It will have to defend an energy policy that is of benefit to all consumers (individuals and manufacturers). … We must build a European energy policy without any dogmatism in mind except the one of efficiency”.
Speaking on behalf of the Greens/EFA, Claude Turmes of Luxembourg said “neither consumers nor smaller, emerging energy suppliers are able to properly benefit from the initial phase of energy market liberalisation and we welcome the Commission's attempt to address this”. A supporter of ownership unbundling which, in his view, is the “only way to guarantee true market liberalisation”, he nonetheless accuses the Commission of having given way to pressure from Germany and France by proposing the ISO (independent system operator) alternative. Such an option, he says, is “an attempt to appease the big energy oligopolies” and “could jeopardise the ultimate goal of liberalisation”. Turmes nonetheless welcomes the introduction of the new legislative package for a safeguard provision (reciprocity clause) to restrict access by third country operators to the European energy sector. “Non-European firms cannot expect to have the same access rights in Europe that they deny to their European counterparts”, he said.
Francis Wurtz of France, who is president of the GUE/NGL Group, described as “dangerous” the Commission's proposal for ownership unbundling which aims at the “dismantling of major companies trusted by all for the quality of their service”. “Energy is a strategic asset, essential to the economy as well as to society. It is a common asset to which any and everybody has to have access. The service of general interest that entails the production transportation and distribution of energy has to be defined democratically and entrusted to public operators equipped with the necessary industrial means”, he points out in a press release.
We would point out that no reaction was given to the press by the Socialist Group, which is divided over the question of effective separation of service providers and network operators. In answer to a question put by EUROPE, Robert Goebbels of Luxembourg, Vice-President and Group Coordinator for energy issues, acknowledged that the different national delegations have different reactions. He said there were two opposite camps - that of the British and Swedish (in favour of ownership unbundling) and that of the Germans and French (against ownership unbundling). He nonetheless assures that he is seeking to “maintain unity” within the group on this question. Goebbels also commented that the EP's support expressed in its resolution of 10 July (Vidal Quadras report) on the question of ownership unbundling was “far more critical than it would seem” not only for gas, for which the EP calls for specific solutions to be found, but also for electricity. Finally, Goebbels welcomed the introduction of provisions aimed at restricting access to the European energy sector by non-European operators. “We have been a little naïve in Europe”, he said, concluding: “In globalised capitalism, the other states have the right to restrict foreign investment and ban certain acquisitions. I welcome this philosophical change on the part of the Commission and encourage it not to ringfence the market but to call for reciprocity and judge on a case by case basis”. (eh)