Proposition 53K2805

Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 11 avril 2003 sur les provisions constituées pour le démantèlement des centrales nucléaires et pour la gestion des matières fissiles irradiées dans ces centrales.

General information ¶

Authors

PS | SP Isabelle Emmery, Mohammed Jabour, Karine Lalieux, Laurence Meire

Submission date

May 13, 2013

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

waste management energy policy nuclear power station nuclear energy nuclear policy radioactive waste decommissioning of power stations

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR VB

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 ¶

Feb. 12, 2014 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

The rapporteur, Mr. Schiltz, is absent and refers to his written report.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, This is, of course, a matter of great importance.

In accordance with the instructions of the Round Table, Paul Magnette, former Minister of Energy, had initiated in 2011, and in accordance with European legislation and regulatory framework, we had to change and improve our own legislation.

I recall that the Act of 11 April 2003 had established a monitoring committee in charge of exercising the opinions and control tasks with regard to nuclear supply companies. Initially, this committee consisted of six representatives of the state.

In 2007, the Minister of Energy Verwilghen, amended the law of 2003, converted this committee into a Nuclear Provision Commission, and especially introduced in the latter representatives of the operators, with deliberative votes, which obviously raised questions.

However, as was stressed in the preparatory work of the April 2007 law, the presence of representatives of the nuclear provisioning company, i.e. the controlled body, within the commission whose objective is the control of that company, is not compatible with good governance: the controlled is also the controller.

As early as 2006, the European Commission indicated that the national authority should be independent of contributors to the Fund. An opinion was repeated on 8 March 2013 at a meeting of the European Commission. It was time for us to work on this issue.

The fact that the nuclear provisioning company, Synatom, proposed, at the end of 2011, to reduce the amount previously approved by the commission for the dismantling and management of fissile materials, also demonstrated the total absurdity and the harmfulness of this confusion between the control body and the controlled body.

Thus, it became necessary to radically change the role and importance of the nuclear provisioning company within the committee in order to conform to the European recommendations, but also to end a completely inconsistent situation that gave voting rights to the controlled body within the supervisory body. Indeed, seeing Synatom owned by Electrabel, participating in the vote on the amount of the budget needed for the effective dismantling of nuclear power plants, owned by the same Electrabel, it had no sense.

Today, Synatom’s presence in the committee will therefore be limited to a mere consultation – in my opinion, perfectly legitimate and indispensable – but without any right to vote.

This is the fundamental point of the bill that is being submitted to you. A fundamental point, of course, but not a single element, as the proposal also aims to simplify the modalities of financing the dismantling of nuclear power plants. Considering the decisions taken by this Parliament, this is indispensable. In fact, the amounts necessary for this dismantling will be available from the first request made by the Nuclear Provision Commission. This is an important advance.

The government agreement specified that we should amend this law. The Minister and the Secretary of State encouraged us to act and I thank them for this. I also thank all the colleagues who participated in the improvement of the law, in particular through various amendments submitted and voted.

Everyone took their responsibilities: indeed, this law was voted unanimously by the Economy Commission. More transparency and efficiency in its operation, more assurance that the fund is immediately available, given the challenge of future dismantling of nuclear power plants, this is a significant step forward.

Mr. Speaker, also in this regard a brief presentation, largely in line with Mr. Lalieux’s presentation. Our group has long been a party asking to update the functioning of the Nuclear Provision Commission and, more broadly, the management of nuclear commissions. This is also a strong demand from the relevant institutions, including the NIRAS. This question was already formulated to Mr. Wathelet’s predecessor, Mr. Magnette. Today, however, an important first step is being made. This is only the first step because there is still a lot of work on the shelf. Our group is a requesting party to strengthen the long-term NIRAS in the global management of commissions. This is a step that is not taken today.

However, as regards the functioning of the Nuclear Provision Commission, it is in any case a major step forward that the voting rights of the nuclear operators themselves are removed through Synatom. Synatom will continue to play an advisory role. We had a discussion on it in the committee and our group would have liked to see it differently, but well, it is a step forward that should be welcomed.

Finally, there is also a longer-term focus on the repayability of nuclear provision. This remains an important competitive advantage for the nuclear sector. This will be work for a next legislative initiative of which our group will of course be at the base or on which it will cooperate.

I would like to thank my colleagues for a relatively constructive discussion. It was a parliamentary initiative, which is always more pleasant than when the initiative comes from the government.

After a presentation like that of Mr. Calvo, I would rather be silent.