Fuente: © European Parliament
http://www.europarl.eu.int/

EU: High oil prices: structural causes, speculation and taxes debated by MEPs

/noticias.info/ Are rising oil prices mainly the result of long term economic changes at global level, or is speculation more of a factor? Should taxes on energy be cut across the board to help consumers and businesses, or should support be targeted on those hardest hit? These were some of the issues raised in a debate with Council and Commission on the impact of the high oil and energy prices.
Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs told MEPs he started each day by checking oil prices, and lately the direction was always up. The dollar price had tripled in three years. "Our dependency on imported oil is high and costs are increasing steadily. There is a direct negative impact on citizens and businesses."

The Commission, he said, had been working through a five-point plan since 2005, with steps on energy efficiency, cars, fuel quality and renewable energy. This should lead to a decrease in oil consumption in the years ahead, as the switch to more efficient and renewable energy sources begins. "Our policies have not failed: without them the current situation would be even harder. But we need to step up our efforts," he said.

In the short term, there could be steps to help consumers and the most vulnerable groups through social measures, targeted at poorest households, but he said we should be cautious about tax changes. They were often politically attractive, but could end up making the long term problem more difficult.

The recent climate and energy package was aimed at sustainability, security of supply and efficiency. "We should lead international action and enable functioning of global, efficient energy markets. A renewed push for renewable energy is beneficial for the climate, but also our economy."

For the Council presidency -in-office, Slovenian European affairs minister Janez Lenarcic stressed that the causes of the oil price rises were structural in nature: it was unlikely that oil production would increase to meet demand. Solutions would have to be long-term in nature and would include more competitive energy markets, greater transparency on the oil markets, diversification of supply and increased energy efficiency.

Mr Lenarcic recalled the EU's goals of cutting energy consumption by 20% and deriving 20% of energy from renewable sources by 2020. Legislation would not be enough to achieve energy savings: both domestic and industrial consumers must be urged to make an effort. And measures in addition to those already taken by the EU would be needed to promote diversification.

The minister also reminded the House of the Manchester Agreement of 2003, under which the EU had undertaken "not to react to oil prices through distorting fiscal measures". In addition, he referred to last week's G8 meeting, which had concluded that "oil price rises are a global problem requiring a global solution". Concluding, he said the need was for coordinated measures at EU and international level, and these measures "must be prudent and not create fresh problems".

Political group speakers

For the EPP-ED group, Jean-Pierre AUDY said we needed imagination. He called for a Community instrument to ensure annual energy price stability, "so that people could plan ahead for major changes in energy prices, without constant daily fluctuations due to speculators."

Hannes SWOBODA (AT) spoke for the Socialist Group. He complained that the Commission was not addressing speculation as a cause for part of the price rises. "The proposal is very weak so far. We sought to protect consumer rights when we voted on the Morgan report [on the electricity market] and social measures are needed too. Citizens, like those in Ireland, worry that nothing happens to take account of their concerns."

For the ALDE group, Marco CAPPATO (IT), said there was no need to impose price controls. Instead we should aim for more ambitious targets on energy efficiency. "The gas market debate shows that only the Member State governments are opposing a real European policy of competition and an appropriate energy mix Let's not ask Europe to solve problems national politicians have caused us," he said.

Claude TURMES (LU) of the Greens/EFA group proposed coordinated national taxes on energy speculators, given the "huge" profits of Exxon and similar companies. This could raise revenue to help those most hurt by oil price rises and fund measures for energy efficiency. "This is a structural crisis," he said, "we need to be more ambitious on energy efficiency."

Gintaras DIDŽIOKAS (UEN, LT) said the EU's energy product tax policy should be updated. The public was paying VAT, excise duty and import taxes, and paradoxically the authorities wanted to squeeze the public further. Tax policy changes were not the whole solution but could introduce an element of greater flexibility.

On behalf of his group, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS (GUE/NGL, EL) was disappointed with the Council and Commission, whom he accused of being long on words but short on action. He saw speculators as part of the problem. And national treasuries, which actually benefited from oil price rises at the public's expense, could use their revenue to mitigate the effects of price rises on the most vulnerable parts of the population.

Commissioner's response to debate

In his response to the debate, Commissioner Piebalgs downplayed the impact of speculation on prices, noting that it was physically impossible for companies to horde large oil stocks. High prices were a market signal that more investment was needed, and no European companies were making windfall profits without investing. The right solution, he said, was to make energy efficiency the number one priority, and also taking action to boost renewable and alternative energy sources, such as nuclear power. notas_de_prensa_archivo