Speeches

Mr President, Commissioner, the political focus on cleaning up our energy system has rightly been high in recent years. But at the same time, we have left affordability and security of supply too much to the market. And that is now reflected in energy bills, at the pump and in our dependence on Russia. It is morally unacceptable for me in these black days on our continent that we contribute 600 million euros a day to Putin's war with our gas and oil imports. This dependence needs to be reduced quickly. But that's not easy. This requires realpolitik in our energy policy. Ask countries that want to shut down nuclear power plants: ‘Keep them open.’ Ask gas producing countries: ‘Deliver us more’, and ask households and businesses to turn down heating. Let's accelerate solar, wind and hydrogen projects and better connect the energy systems of European countries. Europe has been rudely awakened from its geopolitical and strategic hibernation. We need to be much more able to generate our own energy, to defend our own European territory and to produce essential products such as medicines, batteries and computer chips ourselves. It's time to take responsibility for our place in the world again.

Mr President, almost 30% of the EU population lives in border regions. Regions which are often a long way from national capitals and often feel left behind by them. Today’s topic is an example of this. At the same time, these border regions are among those that benefit the most from European cooperation and experience its successes and flaws on a daily basis. Being able to cooperate with regions and municipalities on the other side of the border improves daily life in those regions, for people and for businesses, for example, in the border villages of Baarle—Nassau, in the Netherlands, and Baarle—Hertog, in Belgium. In order to improve cross-border cooperation, the Commission has proposed a mechanism which would allow Member States to use each other’s legislative framework as a means to overcome obstacles. The European cross—border mechanism could help to remove 30-50% of such obstacles and would enable many new cooperation possibilities, such as Project Crossfire, a joint Dutch—German fire brigade in the Twente—Achterhoek—Münsterland region. This project has the support of the regions on both sides of the border, but has been delayed for several years due to the differences in legislation between both countries. The Commission presented its proposal in May 2018, and Parliament adopted its position more than two and a half years ago. The Council, however, has been dragging its feet for the last two years, first by waiting over a year for a legal opinion and then by taking another year to shelve this file altogether. This is not transparent, not democratic, and this is not the way for institutions to work with each other. We understand that some Member States have legitimate concerns, but the best way to address those concerns is to discuss them and to put them on the table. We therefore call on the Council to take a position and to start negotiations with us: maybe governments in the capitals feel that the border regions are far away, but for us, in the European Parliament, and the EPP Group, border regions are at the core of our policy.

Mr President, Commissioner, ‘Can I still pay the bill?’, that is the question that, with the coming winter, hangs like a dark cloud over very normal households. We have promised the next generations to switch to clean energy, and we have to keep that promise. But the promise of security of supply and an affordable price – a public interest – has too easily left governments alone to the market in the energy transition in recent years. Due to the rapid closure of coal-fired power plants and nuclear power plants, we now need plenty of gas. 40% of our gas comes from Russia, and that country likes to keep its hand on the gas tap if it suits them. In addition, market demand is high because countries are emerging from the crisis at the same time, which means a high price. The situation is complex. There are no quick and easy solutions. In the short term, only national governments can keep people's energy bills manageable. Countries will also have to build up larger gas reserves so that we do not have the same debate here again next year. And in the longer term, European cooperation can and should ensure a sensible energy transition and a sensible phasing out of the current system. We need to reduce energy demand by, for example, better insulating homes. The cleanest and cheapest energy is the energy we don't use. We must significantly increase the production of solar, wind and nuclear energy in particular, because the current situation again proves that we do not have the luxury of sweeping technology off the table. And we need to better connect countries' energy systems. In short, a robust energy system and a sensible transition, because a warm home for your family should not depend on your wallet.

The damage caused by Brexit is enormous. In the Netherlands, it is estimated that the structural costs of Brexit in 2030 have risen to eight billion euros per year. So it is good that this Brexit fund is coming, although of course it can never compensate for all the costs. It does show that in the European Union we stand shoulder to shoulder when there are problems. We do this in such a way that solidarity is also shaped and that the money ends up where the damage is greatest. We did this with the European Recovery Fund of EUR 750 billion and, fortunately, with this fund of EUR 5 billion. Now it is important for the Commission and the Member States to make this money available to all fishermen, entrepreneurs and transporters affected by Brexit without obstacles as soon as possible. I would like to conclude by congratulating the rapporteur Pascal Arimont on his excellent work on this difficult dossier.

Mr President, solidarity is one of the foundations of the European Union. As Europeans, we are connected to each other, if only simply because we are in the same place on this planet. This applies not only to our peace and stability, but also to the consequences of climate change. This has become painfully clear this summer. While the Dutch province of Limburg, parts of Germany and parts of Belgium were struggling with heavy flooding, parts of southern Europe were literally on fire. The human and economic damage was immense. It also means working together to combat climate change and adapt to changing realities, such as extreme weather events. In this way, we can and should better protect our citizens. As important and good as it is that we respond in solidarity and quickly after disasters, it is better to invest in advance than to compensate afterwards. This can prevent a lot of human suffering. With regard to the response to natural disasters, I would like to call on the Commission to actively engage with the Member States on how they can claim this money as soon as possible, to deal with the issue quickly and to ensure that the money also gets to where it is needed quickly.