Check against delivery!
Mr Chairman,
Committee Members,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I would like to thank you - also on behalf of Federal Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel, who unfortunately cannot be here today due to other commitments - for the invitation to give the opening speech here today at the European Parliament’s Committee on Industry, Research and Energy.
On 1 January 2007 Germany took over the EU Presidency for the first half of this year. Its motto is “Europe – succeeding together”. The idea of an “ever closer union” was born in the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community. The Euratom Treaty, one of the Treaties of Rome, is continuing this European history of ideas. From the union, the six founding States expected tremendous opportunities “for the development and invigoration of industry and the advancement of the cause of peace”. Today, almost 50 years after the signing of Euratom, the project of Europe has still not been completed. Quite the contrary: At the moment, Europe has again entered a phase of dynamism that is unparalleled. This is not only true in geographical terms, as illustrated by the recent accessions of Bulgaria and Romania. It also, ladies and gentlemen, applies to the political level, and in particular to energy policy.
On 17 January of this year, Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel gave her inaugural speech at the European Parliament. I would like to take up her image of “our shared European home”. Mrs Merkel said, I quote: “We are now in the process of fitting it out. We are extending it. We are renovating parts of it.”
For me personally, these words evoke the following: Firstly, to take the courage to break new ground. Secondly, to assume the responsibility for this home. These are virtues that have shaped Europeans for centuries. Virtues that have made a significant contribution to the realisation of the history of ideas, and I am very sure they will continue to do so.
The Euratom Treaty is part of the pillar that supports the roof of this home full of life. But can this specific part of the first pillar be sufficient to support the roof that is the “European Union” with all its past and future changes for the benefit of the EU population? I think that the answer has to be a clear “no”. Since the developments in the atomic energy sector over the past decades have shown that the Euratom corset has become too tight.
The house has become bigger over the past five decades. The process is still ongoing and will continue for a while. The bigger the house and thus ultimately also the roof, the greater must be the flexibility of those who support it. This is the only way to bring to bear the courage and responsibility inherent in the Europeans in an effective way. Many of you probably own homes yourselves, and you will know that these homes have to be maintained. Why should this be different for the big European home?
The Euratom Treaty is lacking flexibility to adapt to the changes and achievements that have come with time and to tackle the new challenges. We have to free the Treaty from its restrictions. We need a modern way of thinking which allows us to address the challenges of the future under different auspices.
Enlargement towards the East has affirmed this need for the field of nuclear safety. Accessions of different counties – such as Lithuania or, on 1 January 2007, Bulgaria – gave the Community the unique opportunity of enhancing nuclear safety in a geographically larger Europe. We have made use of this opportunity, at least to a large extent. However, Euratom alone did not constitute the basis for seizing this opportunity.
The PHARE and TACIS programmes and the Accession Partnerships were implemented outside of the provisions of the Euratom Treaty through specific regulations.
Nevertheless, here is another area to apply the motto “Europe – succeeding together”. This is of prime importance: 152 nuclear power plants are currently being operated in the enlarged European Union. Europe cannot afford a serious accident in any single one of these nuclear power plants.
After the nuclear accident in Chernobyl, ample and sustainable support for self-help measures was provided under the European Commission’s PHARE and TACIS programmes. This contributed to a noticeable improvement of nuclear safety and safety culture in the Central and Eastern European States. The WesternEuropean Nuclear Regulators Association (WENRA) – as a voluntary association – conducted the first overall evaluation of the level of nuclear safety in the candidate countries in order to pave the way to a common European safety culture in the area of atomic energy. Later, this took place in Council bodies in collaboration with the Member States.
The recommendations resulting from the evaluation were accepted and translated into appropriate programmes for improvement.
Looking at EU enlargement towards the East, it becomes clear that Euratom is not sufficient as a framework for cooperation. This is all the more obvious if we look at the political changes of the past 50 years.
There are two aspects I would like to highlight:
The first is that the economic framework conditions for nuclear energy and nuclear policy of the Member States have fundamentally changed since 1957. Since then, many Member States have decided not to use nuclear power plants for energy production or to phase out nuclear energy. The objective of developing nuclear energy has become obsolete.
Moreover, the Euratom Treaty has an obvious democratic deficiency. Today, the European house is home to almost 490 million Europeans. They are represented by the European Parliament. In contrast to the Treaty establishing the European Community, the deficiency of the Euratom Treaty has never been compensated, not even 50 years after the establishment of the Atomic Energy Community.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is a situation we have to overcome, especially in the interest of the EU population. European citizens will no longer accept that, under Euratom, issues that are of general interest are decided without involving the European Parliament.
It must be in Europe’s interest that decisions within the scope of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community are not determined by individual interest groups, but by those who are actually affected by the decisions.
As an example, I would like to mention the Euratom Framework Programme as part of the Seventh Framework Programme for Research.
In contrast to EC programmes, the European Parliament does not have a right of scrutiny here.
A considerable budget for nuclear energy research has been freed for the years 2007-2011. It is disproportionate as compared to the budget for radiation protection.
A comparison with the Specific Programme “Cooperation” also draws the sober conclusion that the budget for renewable energies has not been appropriately augmented as we had hoped, compared to the budget for nuclear energy.
Ladies and gentlemen, does this allocation structure reflect a balanced safeguarding of interests to the benefit of the EU citizens?
If we want to make the Euratom cooperation “fit for the future”, we have to ensure that structures and instruments are created that allow for transparent and rational decision-making. This can only be done in an effective way if we take joint measures to counteract the undue interference of interest groups.
We should thus be resolved to do everything to promote objective decisions and legitimatise them in a democratic way.
The cooperation in radiation protection has led to noticeable improvements in health protection and occupational safety of the EU citizens.
50 years of the Euratom Treaty also means 50 years of joint radiation protection, means “European radiation protection”. The few articles making up the Treaty’s chapter on “Health and Safety” – the legislative heart of European radiation protection – have led to remarkable developments.
At the core of European radiation protection are above all guidelines which have been updated several times, in particular the “basic safety standards” for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers of ionising radiation. They have raised radiation protection standards to a high and generally accepted level, not only with regard to nuclear technology, but predominantly also in other economic sectors and in the everyday lives of EU citizens. Take for example safety standards in the area of the protection of patients, which mainly refer to medical exposure, the main field of radiation protection. Joint improvements in radiation protection were also achieved to protect outside workers and consumers, or on issues such as the obligation to inform the public about emergency planning, or control of the shipment of radioactive substances between States and into and out of the Community.
The joint commitment of the Member States to effective radiation protection is not compromised by different views on the use of atomic energy itself.
The fact that the Directives on radiation protection were unanimously adopted by the Council shows this very clearly.
The consequences of the Chernobyl reactor accident two decades ago in Europe have demonstrated that a common set of instruments is necessary to handle such situations. Such instruments were also established on the basis of the Treaty’s chapter “Health and Safety”.
By insisting on the implementation of the Directives, through its involvement in national permitting procedures and inspections of national monitoring facilities, the EU Commission itself has made a considerable contribution to high radiation protection standards in Europe. There is a need for constant evaluation if the instruments and deadlines for the harmonisation of radiation protection, which were originally developed for the six founding Member States, can now be successfully applied in all areas for 27 Member States. It would certainly be helpful for the further development of European radiation protection legislation with its many areas of application if this was done jointly by the Council and the Parliament in future.
We often hear about shaping Europe. This also implies using new insights, newly acquired knowledge for the protection of the EU citizens, modernising existing structures and thus shaping Europe in the sense that the framework is continuously adapted to changing circumstances.
The latest version of the Euratom basic safety standards was published in the Official Journal of the European Communities more than 10 years ago. An update according to the latest scientific research is thus necessary.
In order to stimulate the review process of the basic safety standards, Germany will hold a conference in Berlin during the EU Presidency.
Although the opportunities involved are obvious, it remains difficult to effectively encourage the EU Commission to obtain a mandate in the context of cooperation with other international organisations. A harmonisation of standards at international level may well be desirable, but the EU Commission can only play an active role after consultation with the Member States. Improvements for these coordination procedures should be considered.
The establishment of a comprehensive and strict safety monitoring system was one of the key goals of the six founding States 50 years ago. They deliberately took on the task of ensuring that civil nuclear material was not set aside for any other than the civil purposes declared by the Member States. Euratom has handled this delicate task with great success up to now, and we know that a continuation of this Euratom concept will also be sufficiently important in future.
In closing, ladies and gentlemen, let me return to our motto “Europe – succeeding together”. In order to succeed together, we need first and foremost jointly made decisions as a foundation. In my understanding, for the nuclear energy pillar this means the necessary involvement of the European Parliament in the decision-making process under Euratom. On this foundation, we can bundle our forces for the upcoming tasks and challenges.
This can also apply to tasks which are currently national, such as safety of nuclear installations and the safety of the disposal of radioactive waste or non-proliferation. Discussions on these issues have been opened at European level, not least by the Commission. However, I would like to stress that these discussions should always follow the concept of “soft integration”. This means: pursuing integration carefully and step by step. The European home can only be effectively supported in the atomic energy sector if the necessary infrastructure, especially personnel with sufficient expertise, is available. Fitting out, extending and renovating the European home is a process that requires patience, perseverance and well-considered measures. Only then can we vouch for the safety of this home in the nuclear sector in a conscientious and responsible way. During its Presidency Germany will encourage a movement into this direction. The best possible nuclear safety in Europe, supported also by the competence of the European Parliament, is a goal that could unite us regardless of all controversies. For the safe use of nuclear power is the common goal of all EU Member States, all EU citizens – irrespective of the energy policy they prefer.
Thank you very much!
