WRITTEN QUESTION E-3501/01 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. State-subsidised cross-border trade in electricity and the lack of reserve capacity for emergencies.
Date: 2002-01-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Germany, Netherlands, State aid, cable transport, competition law, electrical energy, frontier region, single market

C 160 E/126

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.7.2002

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 February 2002)

The Commission’s information is that the number of fishermen from Barbate affected by non-renewal of
the fishery agreement with Morocco is not 4 000 but 649. It is unable at present to say how many of these
have found another job.

Knowing that many fishermen would be unable to find fresh employment at sea, the Commission
proposed specific conversion measures additional to the aid already offered under the Community rules in
force. Adopted by the Council on 18 December 2001, these substantially increase the premiums for
fishermen converting to other activities. Further, coastal zones dependent on fisheries such as Barbate
benefit from Community financial assistance for socio-economic diversification through the Structural
Fund Objective 1 programmes.

On structural investment in tourism, the Commission must point out that under Council Regulation (EC)
No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 on general provisions on the Structural Funds (1) selection of the
individual projects part-financed under each programme is an exclusive responsibility of the Member State.

The Commission has not been informed of any increase in racism in the region nor is it aware of any rise
in drug trafficking or involvement of unemployed fishermen in this.

On resumption of discussions with Morocco, the Commission must point out that the Council concluded
on 24 April 2001 that it was impossible as matters stood to reach a mutually beneficial fishery agreement
between the Community and Morocco.

Since then the Commission has received no formal or indeed any proposal from the Moroccan authorities
on the future of our fishery relations. If any approach is made the Commission will carefully examine the
proposal and if appropriate seek a mandate from the Council to reopen negotiations.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2002/C 160 E/162)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3501/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Subject: State-subsidised cross-border trade in electricity and the lack of reserve capacity for emergencies

1.
Can the Commission confirm that, although certain cross-border power lines were installed primarily
for use in emergencies, the Netherlands makes full use of them even under normal circumstances to
import 20 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity, equivalent to one fifth of domestic demand, so that if the
Netherlands’ domestic electricity production were unexpectedly to be interrupted, no additional imports
would be possible to compensate temporarily for the shortfall?

2.
Is the Commission aware that, in addition to the five existing power lines between the Netherlands
and its two neighbours, the energy companies operating in the Netherlands and TenneT, the operator of
the electricity grid, are establishing extra capacity for electricity imports by constructing a new line from
Germany which could quickly increase import capacity by 25 % to 25 billion kilowatt-hours, or a quarter
of domestic electricity demand?

4.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 160 E/127

To what extent is the Netherlands promoting these electricity imports by subsidising the generation
3.
of electricity from coal or lignite in Germany, which makes this electricity cheaper than electricity
produced in the Netherlands?

4. Will the Commission seek the introduction of a ceiling on Member States’ imports of electricity in
order to prevent overloading of the interconnecting system?

5. Will the Commission seek the introduction of a ceiling on Member States’ imports of electricity in
order to prevent distortion of competition by state subsidies for production?

Source: ‘De Volkskrant’, 23 October 2001

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(15 February 2002)

In the concrete example of

The Commission is not completely in agreement with the statement of the Honourable Member that
1.
cross-border lines were primarily installed for use in emergencies.
the
Netherlands, for instance, certain lines were built, or capacity on the lines was increased, in order to allow
for imports from neighbouring countries. This was a policy decision taken by the Dutch authorities instead
of building more new generation capacity in the Netherlands itself. It is true that, at present, the import
capacity of the Netherlands is being used intensively because of the existing price difference between the
Netherlands and neighbouring countries. However, all Transmission System Operators operate the network
and the interconnections under strict security standards. The lines are operated under the assumption that
in case the biggest domestic electricity plant should shut down, no problems would occur in the supply of
electricity,
inter alia by calling in the help from neighbouring Transmission System Operators. In the
concrete case of the Netherlands, Tennet was able to maintain safe operation of the Dutch network last
year (2001) even in the event of disturbances, or generation shortage, in the range from 1 200 to 1 500
MegaWatt (MW). Help from neighbouring Transmission System Operators was called in, and could be
provided without difficulty, as the security standards under which the interconnectors are operated allow
for this assistance.

The Commission is aware of the fact that increase in interconnection capacity with Germany is under
2.
preparation. No new lines are being built at this moment, but on the Meede-Diele border crossing, new
transformers ready by September 2003 will allow for an increase in import capacity of around 1 000 MW,
effectively bringing the import capacity of the Netherlands to 25 % of domestic demand.

3.
The aid granted to German coal production is granted according to the Community’s state aid rules
applying to the coal sector. These state aid rules are being applied without discrimination in the
Community. The Netherlands is not seeking to promote this type of electricity generation by importing
electricity from German suppliers, but seeks to buy supplies at competitive prices.

4.
The Commission will not seek a ceiling on Member States’ imports of electricity for reasons of
security of the network. The Transmission System Operators operate the interconnected network according
to strict security standards. The Commission does not consider it necessary to regulate this aspect of the
business of transmission system operators.

5.
In the framework of the internal market, imports between Member States can not be limited under
normal circumstances. The only exception allowed for under the Electricity Directive, Directive 96/92/EC
of the Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 1996 concerning common rules for the internal
market in electricity (1) is that of reciprocity, meaning that Member States with a larger share of market
opening can refuse certain imports from Member States with a smaller share of market opening. The issue
the Honourable Member refers to concerns state aid to certain types of electricity production. State aid can
be granted under certain conditions and has to be approved by the Commission, for instance in the case of
renewables production. The state aid rules are applied without
indigenous coal production or
discrimination between Member States. The Commission will not therefore seek a ceiling on Member
States’ imports for reasons of state aid.

(1) OJ L 27, 30.1.1997.