WRITTEN QUESTION E-1754/01 by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Electricity from renewable sources in the Netherlands.
Date: 2001-06-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Netherlands, consumer protection, electrical energy, energy policy, energy supply, environmental tax, import restriction, liberalisation of the market, renewable energy

C 364 E/196

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.12.2001

Community expenditure from 1990 to 2000 was over € 800 million. Further expenditure of nearly
2.
€ 200 million is foreseen until 2006 for improvement plans still in operation. In addition to this, producer
organisations whose improvement plans were approved in 1990 were able to request continued financing
of their plans for up to one year.

However such specific aid was always intended to be temporary and digressive, in order to allow a shift of
financial responsibility on to the growers. On this basis, the Commission considers that a prolongation of
improvement plans to provide economic support for the sector is not the most appropriate method to
address this issue. The issue of nuts therefore has to be looked at in a wider context.

As for all other products in the fruit and vegetable sector, aid is available for nuts through the operational
fund scheme of Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organization of
the market in fruit and vegetables (2), which provides financial support for all fruit and vegetables marketed
through producer organisations.

3.
Finally, taking into account environmental and social aspects of nut production, Member States can
of course include nuts in their rural development plans under the conditions of Council Regulation (EC)
No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural
Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations (3).

(1) OJ L 118, 20.5.1972.
(2) OJ L 297, 21.11.1996.
(3) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2001/C 364 E/213)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1754/01

by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(15 June 2001)

Subject: Electricity from renewable sources in the Netherlands

No fewer than 40 % of households in the Netherlands are considering switching to electricity from
renewable sources. As from 1 July 2001, consumers in the Netherlands will be able to select their own
supplier of renewable ((cid:145)green(cid:146)) electricity, no matter where they live. Essent BV is already offering green
electricity at prices which undercut those of electricity from non-renewable sources. The price differential
has been made possible by the Regulatory Energy Tax, which is not levied on green electricity. In order to
meet the rapidly growing demand, Dutch suppliers wish to buy in green electricity from abroad.

The Netherlands Ministry of Economic Affairs wishes to limit imports of green electricity because it fears
the loss of revenue from the Regulatory Energy Tax if large numbers of people switch to green electricity.
The sum at stake is said to be € 1,8 billion (NLG 4 billion).

The Regulatory Energy Tax (commonly referred to as the EcoTax) was introduced with the aim of curbing
energy consumption and encouraging consumers to switch to green electricity. The revenue is intended to
enable income tax to be cut and labour made cheaper in relation to energy.

Surely this is a senseless turn of events?

To what extent are the plans of the Ministry of Economic Affairs incompatible with the liberalisation of
the energy market?

20.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 364 E/197

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(1 August 2001)

The Commission always felt that the changing circumstances due to liberalisation of Community(cid:146)s energy
markets had to be reflected in a European framework for the promotion of electricity renewable energy
sources within the internal market. With the recent agreement by Council and Parliament on the
Commission proposal for a Directive on the promotion of electricity produced from renewable energy
sources in the internal electricity market, this framework will soon be in place and will give a positive
impetus to the situation of electricity from renewable energy sources.

Concerning the Dutch situation, at the moment, around half a million customers have decided to switch to
green electricity in the Netherlands. They can either switch supplier or stay with their current electricity
supplier. The demand of the customers that have chosen for green electricity at this moment equals more
or less the percentage of current production of green electricity in the Netherlands.

Imports of renewable generated electricity into the Netherlands are allowed until 1 January 2002, under
the conditions that also count for Dutch produced green electricity, meaning that they benefit from an
exemption from the regulating energy tax (REB). The Dutch authorities are not in any way considering
closing the borders for green electricity. On the contrary, if demand for green electricity keeps growing,
imports will need to play an important role.

The Dutch authorities are now considering the options for dealing with the issue of imported green
electricity from 2002 onwards. As soon as clarity has been provided by the Dutch authorities in this
matter, the Commission will inform the Honourable Member of the details.

(2001/C 364 E/214)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1755/01

by Dorette Corbey (PSE) and Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Mussel beds in the German part of the Waddenzee

(15 June 2001)

The German Fisheries Department has granted a German company a licence to harvest mussels from
a young mussel bed near Delfzijl in the Netherlands. The area in question has been designated a special
conservation area under the Directives on Wild Birds and Habitats. In recent years a number of mussel
beds in the Waddenzee have disappeared. The current policy of the Netherlands Government is geared to
restoring the mussel beds. The oystercatcher and eiderduck populations have recently declined substan-
tially. Both oystercatchers and eiderduck feed on cockles and mussels.

Could the harvesting of mussels result in irreparable damage or damage which can only be remedied

1.
with difficulty (significant damage) to the mussel beds?

2.

Could the harvesting of mussels be a threat to oystercatchers and eiderduck?

Are there strong reasons of public interest in favour of granting a licence despite the possibility of

3.
significant damage?

4.

Does the licence contravene the Habitats and Wild Birds Directives?

How compatible is the licence with the principles of the biodiversity policy laid down in the action

5.
plan for biodiversity for fisheries?