Proposition 50K1242

Projet de loi portant modification de la loi du 12 avril 1965 relative au transport de produits gazeux et autres par canalisations et portant confirmation de l'arrêté royal du 18 janvier 2001 relatif au système provisoire visant à couvrir les frais de fonctionnement de la Commission de Régulation de l'Electricité et du Gaz (CREG).

General information ¶

Submitted by

Groen Open Vld Vooruit PS | SP Ecolo MR Verhofstadt Ⅰ

Submission date

May 8, 2001

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

natural gas energy supply gas liberalisation of trade pipeline transport

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen Ecolo LE PS | SP Open Vld MR FN VB

Abstained from voting

CD&V

Party dissidents ¶

• Luc Goutry (CD&V) voted to adopt.
• Karel Pinxten (Open Vld) abstained from voting.

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

June 14, 2001 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr. Speaker, this type of project is not of the most exciting and does not mobilize the crowd; nevertheless, it is the result of long efforts.

I will simply recall the three objectives of this bill which are, within the framework of the liberalization of the electricity and gas market, the provision to the CREG of delegated officials for the investigation and prosecution of violations of the law, the accelerated liberalization of distribution and electricity producers and end customers and the introduction of regulated tariffs.

I would like to go somewhat beyond the framework of this project which is important for all those who want liberalization to take place in the nearest possible timeframe. Belgium will obviously cling to these requirements of liberalization since the European Commission requires that this be done by 2005.

For environmentalists, it is important that this liberalization is combined with measures that allow, parallel to this liberalization, both the regulation of energy markets according to environmental imperatives and the encouragement of the use of clean energies.

This involves several things. First, policies that lead to a reduction in consumption, regardless of the nature of the energy used. The measures necessary to ⁇ this objective are obviously beyond the scope of this bill, but, by committing itself both to the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol and to the support of the European Commission, which has just communicated a text on sustainable development, the Belgian government seems to be committed, in my opinion, to put in place all the tools necessary to ⁇ the objectives envisaged.

I also take advantage of this intervention to remind that Belgium also has a tool, a guide for concrete actions, which is the federal plan for sustainable development, and that we must maximize this tool.

There is also a need for policies that promote the use of non-polluting or the least possible polluting energy products and natural gas is among the sources of energy to be preferred, at the expense of oil and electricity, as long as it is produced mostly by nuclear energy.

There is still a need for policies that allow the regulation of the means and economic consequences of liberalization and we are thus coming to the content of this bill that goes beyond the requirements of the European Commission with regard to the transport of natural gas.

The European requirement is therefore to separate the functions of transport, transit, distribution and storage. It requires that the share of transport costs be differentiated in the tariffs. The Belgian government goes further, in particular due to the fact that in Belgium there is only one transport operator. State regulation is therefore indispensable; access to the transmission network will be subject to regulated tariffs instead of using commercial negotiations.

We hope, parallel to this, that the federal state will be able to quickly conclude agreements with the regions to extend this regulation to distribution. The price for the end customer actually belongs to the regional competencies while the federal level intervenes for social rates. These negotiations with the regions are all the more important as they need to reach an agreement for the establishment of a social fund. This will be financed by the gas market participants. It will guarantee the public service function that is necessary to counter the exclusions generally resulting from liberalization mechanisms.

Another important necessity to which this bill responds is to confirm the currently provisional mechanism that allows to finance the CREG, an indispensable tool for the function of regulation of the electricity and gas market. by

Finally, we hope that the working group working on the question of how to maintain the incomes paid to communes through the dividends paid by intercommunal communes will quickly find a solution and that these communes will express an interest in becoming shareholders, managers of the transmission networks, whether it is electricity or gas, in order to participate in the profits resulting from this activity. They will also have to ensure the quality of the service rendered to their citizens.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Secretary of State, colleagues, I would like to address the President first. I know that you are very concerned about the functioning of this institution and I would like to communicate about the work of the Committee on Business.

At the beginning of the work, the Secretary of State, the opposition and Mrs Gerkens were present as serving President. Well, we had to wait the full 40 minutes for another member of the majority before we could start working in the committee. The same happened at the beginning of the voting. Ms. Gerkens has had to postpone the vote due to "no presence of the majority". Then the meeting was suspended for 20 minutes and at the time of the voting we had to wait half an hour for the presence of the members of the majority. Eventually, the opposition left the committee and then the majority without a doubt, with seven present, was able to approve this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I repeat that we had to wait 40 minutes before we could start the discussion because of the absence of the members of the majority.

Mrs. I share your opinion. This is not acceptable. I understand that committees sometimes overlap, but “la majorité doit assumer la majorité” and I want to insist on the group leaders of the majority to watch over it. Per ⁇ there were technical problems, but please avoid repeating the accusations I have to hear here from Mrs. Creyf.

Mr. Speaker, I am willing to examine Mrs. Creyf’s frustrations, but one must admit that this cannot be done right now. If I am not mistaken, Mr. Ansoms, the chairman of that committee, was also not present. I will at least check what exactly happened.

Mr. Coveliers, I have spoken in general and I believe Mrs. Creyf.

Mr. Speaker, there was no problem with the Presidency: Mrs. Gerkens is the First Vice-President and she was present.

Mr. Coveliers, it’s also a matter of politeness: 40 minutes for a secretary of state and colleagues to wait. Everyone can use their time better.

I would like to comment on the draft law.First, our situation on natural gas. I’m not saying anything new when I say we don’t have resources, but we don’t have meaningful storage capacity either. That is, our dependence on the foreign country is very large.

This is a first problem. Their

The second problem is the peak moments, for example in a tough winter. We will then have to resort to peak installations abroad, which will also cost us a lot of money. This very large dependence makes us question the Belgian strategy in this regard. Is there a gas or natural gas strategy? I think we must first and foremost implement a policy to avoid peak consumption. These peaks are especially expensive and pose a problem in the supply. Then we need to conclude more contracts that are interruptible. At the moment there are already, but I think we need to evolve further there. Furthermore, a better management of gas demand is needed. We must also have the courage to ask questions about the transport of gas to areas where the penetration is low. We must dare again to address the problem and discuss diversification of resources.

In my opinion, every strategy is lacking on these points and that is a pity, because without policy we are handed over to a number of major operators in the natural gas market. We depend on them both in terms of the price of the gas as well as the quantity and the certainty of delivery.

The second point is the opening of the gas market. It happens too slowly. In a sense, I can understand and follow this, precisely because of our vulnerability and our dependence on the outside world, because they call for caution.

However, we must not forget the competition factor. If we open the market so slowly – together with France we are almost the worst European pupil – our prices will remain high. Without competition, there is no pressure on prices, which is detrimental to both commercial and industrial enterprises, the service sector, the distribution sector and the small consumer.

Mr. Secretary of State, yesterday we could read in De Standaard that you regret that electricity prices in Belgium are still so high and still have not fallen. I have already pointed out almost all my statements on this subject here, but the difference is, of course, that we can only point to it and that you are the one who bears responsibility for it. Their

The third point concerns regulated prices. We support them because they lead to greater transparency. We support your policy in this regard. Their

The fourth point concerns the division of Distrigaz. The draft law does not provide for the splitting or bundling of, on the one hand, the purchase and sale and, on the other hand, the transport function. You have always mentioned that the European Directive does not provide for this either. We know that that directive, and the fact that the unbundling is not included therein, results from the fact that the Member States have not been able to reach an agreement on this issue. This issue is currently being reviewed at the European level. We are in favour of complete division. At the moment, there is still some control through, among other things, the participation of the municipalities. The great role that the foreign country plays here makes us prefer to complete division, also because gas transit is a very important activity in Belgium. Their

I now come to my fifth point, the coherence between Flanders and Wallonia. The Flemish decree provides for a higher opening rate, which, however, only a few hundred companies can enjoy. The pace is also different. All these different opening levels and rates do not lead to a coherent whole, ⁇ with respect to our partners and the operators on the ground.

Through consultation, consensus should be achieved. The consultation with the regions already exists – in that regard the interministerial conference has already been referred to – but only partially, although I think a permanent and thorough consultation is necessary.

The natural gas sector is very important, both for electricity production and for households, and the policy being conducted in this regard is inadequate. In view of the international market, we need to play the maximum of competition. That is the only way to lower prices, which you ⁇ advocate, Mr. Secretary of State, but for which there are few initiatives in your policy.

General discussion is closed. The general discussion is closed.