EUROPEAN COMMISSION DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Employment and Social Legislation, Social Dialogue Social dialogue, Industrial Relations Brussels, 23 September 2011 SECTORAL DIALOGUE COMMITTEE ELECTRICITY Minutes of the plenary meeting 23rd of June 2011 Chairperson: Mr Bernd Frieg (VPE CH, replacing Mr. Ruden who could not attend due to change of date) 1. Adoption of the draft agenda The draft agenda was adopted. EPSU suggested that under AOB the letter that Social Partners received from the COM on Smart Meters should be discussed. 2. Approval of the draft minutes from past two sessions Draft minutes of the plenary session from December 2010 and the working group meeting from March 2011 are adopted by the committee without changes. 3. Follow-up on joint position on external energy relations EPSU mentioned that a document on external energy policy was circulated by the COM, which however does not take into account the joint contribution of the Social Partners to the public consultation the social dimension is not taken into account. Social Partners agreed to resend the joint contribution 1 from March since the Communication from the COM is expected at the beginning of September. Secretariat will send it to the COM with a cover letter asking that the joint contribution is taken into account during the drafting process. 4. Joint position on nuclear safety EPSU made a presentation on the topic of nuclear safety and security in nuclear power plants. The following issues were outlined as important during discussions at secretariat level and were suggested to be included in a joint document: - as an industry we strive for the highest level of standards in safety and security - transparency and accountability Commission and regulatory bodies have decided on the criteria about stress tests, results will be published in the second half of 2012. A discussion about the role of the SPs in the information process also took place at the 1 Available at http://www.epsu.org/img/pdf/eu_external_energy_dimension_09032011_joint_contribution.pdf
secretariat level. The fact that a debate took place at European level but SPs were not invited to join this debate should be addressed by the Social Partners. - Key importance of health and safety - Independence of the nuclear regulators an issue not discussed at secretariat level their credibility and independence as well as capacity to work. - Another item to be discussed with Eurelectric - training for everyone in the whole chain from building phase to decommissioning/waste disposal how do we deal with training and health and safety of workers employed by third parties, those who are not directly employed. In the EU a risk of a human error posed the biggest threat also potentially endangering subcontractors. - Decommissioning some governments have decided not to prolong the lifespan of reactors key issues are qualifications, retraining, long-term skills is important in this case. It is necessary that health and safety issues are taken into account. - Skills and training retirees have a high knowledge about the site, demographic change needs to be taken into account as well - It is important to relate to the broader European debate; we can discuss with the COM what do the decisions in individual countries mean with regard to different scenarios in the Roadmap 2050 and also with regard to the ENSO electricity group what are the conclusions the COM draws from that. - COM has opened also the nuclear safety directive, it might be useful to reflect on this this also needs to reflect the highest health and safety and training requirement, including the whole chain of the industry also taking into account workers employed by 3rd parties. - Issue of skills we have asked the COM to prepare an overview. As Social Partners we have stressed this issue many times and COM has not responded to joint statements. We need to ask the COM again what they think about the impact of development of skills on the future developments in the energy sector including the nuclear sector. - Important question regarding decommissioning ask the COM to give an overview of the lessons taken from past decommissioning processes in different countries implications for skills, safety, funding etc.; there might be different lessons - present this to the SPs. - COM to present the first results of the nuclear stress tests during the PL in December. This is the list of issues from EPSU-EMCEF side to be further discussed with Eurelectric during the October working group meeting. Eurelectric/RWE Npower plc agreed that these points be discussed further and also stressed the importance of ensuring maximum health and safety. Eurelectric welcomed the proposition to have a COM presentation on stress tests in December to further discuss this issue. EMCEF supported the outline presented by EPSU. The importance of a joint declaration and the need for the Social Partners to remain engaged on this issue was emphasized. FO-FR mentioned that the key question is not nuclear power yes/no but the safety of workers and Social Partners have a role to play here. Safety in some countries remains a problem in particular safety of subcontractors. Social Partners need to follow the stress tests results and in case there is room for improvement, make this clear. The need to reassure the general public was also mentioned as there is a fear about social acceptability of the nuclear energy among the European public. It is not a question in the sense of re-opening the matter in a way the Social Partners already have. Due to the fears about nuclear energy the joint declaration should address this issue Social Partners should, where possible, send positive messages to the public. The weak point is the safety of subcontractors.
UNESA mentioned that these are all interesting topics, however the main topic discussed is health and safety of nuclear plants after Fukushima. A lot of the items mentioned by EPSU can not be influenced by the Social Partners. In Spain for example the members of the National nuclear council are working inside the plants and work with the workers, they have direct information from them. EPSU responded that the reason for the statement is to position ourselves as industry. There are things which are obvious such as highest levels possible of security and safety, however it is important for us to make it clear for the public and the public debate - this statement could make this clear. All these issues are open for discussion - health and safety, skills etc. The suggestion is that we will work on this further and then Eurelectric can have a discussion internally. This can be then further discussed during the meeting at the end of September. Chairman Social Partners to coordinate on this during the summer and exchange the draft document outlining these points to be discussed in more detail during the next meeting in September; presentation by the COM on nuclear stress tests will then take place in December. 5. COM presentation on Energy Roadmap 2050 (Mr. Michael Klipper, DG ENER) General context: the Roadmap for a low-carbon economy was presented in March 2011 2. The Energy Roadmap is at the stage of drafting, it will be released at the end of 2011. The European Council has decided in 2009 that we have a target of 80/95 percent below 1990 levels of CO 2 emissions. Council in February 2011 held an energy summit where it was confirmed that energy policy is on top of the agenda. European approach to energy policy is needed concerns the completion of the internal energy market by 2014, the external dimension. COM is checking how it can best deliver on this. Council also welcomed the elaboration of the 2050 Strategy since a long-term view is needed for investors. Council said that developments will be under regular review. Main assumption during the preparation of the roadmap is a global climate deal. The presented milestones of the Roadmap for a low-carbon economy are indicative milestones, not political targets they give a good impression of the challenges ahead. DG ENER focus when looking at the Energy Roadmap are mainly the power sector, heating, demand side of transport, etc. Concept: Energy Roadmap is one of the roadmaps that fulfils the overall target in addition to Low-carbon energy roadmap of DG CLIMA shows priorities and other objectives in energy policy sustainability, security of supply, competitiveness, affordability of price. COM wants to show what is possible in order to achieve decarbonisation. COM will demonstrate potential/possible pathways and the scenarios to achieve decarbonisation, but with different options high-energy efficiency/ renewables/high-low CCS/nuclear scenario. The purpose is not to choose one but to give an overview to policymakers of the different options. Key points to consider: 2 Roadmap is available at http://eurlex.europa.eu/lexuriserv/lexuriserv.do?uri=com:2011:0112:fin:en:pdf
There is a real cost of non-europe in transition to a energy renewable system. There are 27 MS how can we most efficiently deploy renewable technologies in the longrun? Need to better explain implications for the markets since each MS chooses its energy mix. Need to establish a long-term perspective 40 years horizon, in order to give signals to investors for the investments which are needed (e.g. consider Desertec). Input of Social Partners regarding skills, training, health and safety as we move forward with the Roadmap, also in the area of explaining the process of change is needed. A public consultation took place stakeholders still continue to submit their positions, the first paper with preliminary results is available on the DG ENER website. Advisory group -15 independent academic experts who meet 3x/year and present their perspective on the Roadmap. Impact assessment is under discussion and will be published the Roadmap will play a significant role during the Danish presidency. More information about the public consultation, the advisory group and other useful information can be found on the website of DG ENER. EPSU asked about the importance for giving a clear perspective to investors and the conclusion that the targets as specified in the Low-carbon Roadmap will become binding targets for 2050? Insecurity for investors will remain if they are not binding. If they are binding, will they be broken down into targets for 2040, 2030 and for individual MS? We constantly face shifting grounds of policy decisions so it would be good to have some clarity. Second question was related to Impact Assessments - how far is the COM in this process? Social Partners were told in December 2010 by DG ENER/EMPL that when they request an option/impact to be taken into account, it is then considered. Social Partners suggested in the Joint Statement contributed to the consultation what will happen with or without applying just employment transition principles with/without being based on social dialogue/training capabilities etc. what are the implications then. Has our proposition be taken into account? EMCEF inquired about the transitional period until 2050 and the plan for transition and sustainability. The transition has positive and negative consequences, what the Social Partners need to know is the impact on employment. The question of standards on health and safety was raised is this integrated in COM policies? It seems that constraints are not existing, with regard to energy efficiency, what is the COM doing about this - constraints need to be set to save energy. Today we see that the price of energy is rising for consumers/citizens what is the EU policy regarding access to energy for all citizens at a reasonable price? How do you intend to deal with this? Transparency is important as well we want to see consequences for the citizens. DG ENER replied that regarding the perspective for investors targets might be discussed, although it is not clear what kind of targets these will be. COM will discuss targets rather as milestones. What kind of milestones for 2030, 2040 is an open question. COM can not provide exact targets now for 40 years ahead the aim here is to look ahead and provide a perspective/indications taking uncertainty of policy-making into account. Regarding Impact Assessments employment, training will play a role. This can not be specified now since the COM is in the process of drafting of the paper and the scenario analysis but further comments from Social Partners are welcome.
With regard to the transitional period until 2050, it was explained that this is related to the question of targets and milestones. The Roadmap is not a programme for the whole EU, the COM would like the EU to be fully decarbonised by 2050, but it does not propose an energy mix since energy is a MS competence. COM is showing the pathways that are possible - different scenarios that can be matched to a potential pathways and what the consequences could be e.g. France uses nuclear energy, Poland uses more coal. Regarding constraints to save energy proposal from yesterday decided by the COM on binding requirements for combined heat and power, building renovation. It is time for implementing measures, it remains to be seen how this unfolds. In 2012/13 when more is known how implementation progresses, it will be known how energy efficiency targets should be today it is only indicative and the focus is on implementation. Price of energy is very important, it is one of three policy goals. Another one is competitiveness which also includes affordability of prices for consumers as well as industry and the last one is security of supply. These three objectives interact. Energy efficiency also depends on what the MS want to do to relax the price-burden on the consumer. EMCEF responded that on EU2020 20 percent CO 2 reduction is shared by all parties. We all need to think of the global context what happens if people in emerging countries do not curb their emissions they continue to emit greenhouses gases and in Europe the industry moves out. All this is related to the price of energy - energy sector and industry employ a lot of people and they are targeted in CO 2 reduction. Energy and industry must make an effort to reduce emission, but so must agriculture. Carbon-free energy has to be pushed, once we have a better technical and economic vision then we will see the investors investing into these new technologies this will also boost employment. Energy mix is in the competence of the countries, we did not seen the break-down for nuclear in your presentation; now everyone wants to leave nuclear, but this is not fully realistic. In France there was a lot of discussion about this so how is this new situation taken into account in DG ENER? Globalisation, energy prices in the EU the energy prices are 20 percent higher than in the US and 200 percent higher than in China. We need to make sure that prices are not so high that no one can buy energy in Europe. Eurelectric posed the questions if the COM plans to unveil what is in the March 2011 roadmap on decarbonisation? Energy efficiency directive proposed yesterday what are the COM expectations with relation to the 2050 Roadmap? What comes next? What should we expect as a sector? There are now 2050 political targets without a legal framework; we do not know the final targets for 2020 and we do not know what happens after 2020. We know there has to be change, but we do not have details which are important for the security for investors what is next and when? The March Roadmap shows the pattern of reduction in the power sector, we would like to know the envisaged energy mix by the COM whether it is the one in the Low-carbon energy roadmap or a new one? DG ENER replied stating that the Roadmap is not only an intellectual exercise. It has impacts, mentions specifics about pathways to a decarbonised energy system. It shows the background of the scenarios taking specific market dynamics into account. In 2020 there will be a more decarbonised energy system, now we are discussing targets/scenarios/credible
goals. Deployment and changes in technology are also discussed, restructuring of the market and similar issues. Energy efficiency directive is included in the scenarios. Energy mix is a MS competence COM will not prescribe some type of a mix for 2030/40 - it is an open question; the COM will be consistent with the Low carbon economy roadmap, but it does not prescribing anything just demonstrates the possibilities. Fukushima impact of phase-out in Germany on other MS, this might/might not happen, first there is a debate on the technical/expert level; politically speaking COM is aware of non- Europe and what the implications would be. Development and deployment of technology regarding development there us a set plan, which is key. Deployment of CCS the questions is whether there is a need for support? We need to have a discussion with stakeholders and academics on that - the general approach is a market-based approach in the energy sector, but there is a need to help with the deployment of some technologies e.g. renewables. 2020 targets the EU should not damage the industry; as policymakers we put emphasis on all three objectives questions such as if there is no global climate deal, what would happen to EU energy policy then are hard to answer now. Chairman Social Partners will follow-up on the impact assessment. Roadmap to be revisited during the December 2011 meeting of the committee. 6) Joint project on Mapping exercise on skills and qualifications in the electricity sector EPSU proposals on the joint project on mapping exercise on skills and qualifications in the electricity sector has been adopted. Response from Eurelectric is expected. Eurelectric supporting the general message of this project, however would like to postpone the mobility issue until next time. We made some comments on the precise wording of the text. It needs to send a unified and consistent message. There is a degree of scepticism as to whether part of the solution is a European skills and sectoral council question? Rather than having an extended debate now it would be better to share comments and have further discussions at the secretariat level. As part of this, we also looked at a possible joint statement, MoU we shall liaise after the meeting, once there is a draft it can be circulated to members to reach approval and then be submitted by the end of August to the COM. EPSU stated that they are aware of the scepticism of Eurelectric of an added value of a European sectoral skills council, which they share. EPSU added that this is a European project for the COM, thus Social Partners have to be careful regarding the wording and structure of the proposal. 7) Formal adoption of the SSDC Electricity Work Programme 2011 2012 RWE Npower pointed out that mobility will be postponed for the next WP. Eurelectric commented on the work programme and suggested to check the proposal put forward by Emanuela Preiti on equal opportunities diversity - life-work balance reconciling personal and professional life. Social Partners agreed with changes under equal opportunities 3 rd column, section How and When the sentence work on the particular aspects of life-
work balance reconciling professional and personal life exploring effectiveness of tailor-work provisions in our sector was added. 8) Any other business EPSU already mentioned the response to the Lowe letter. Joint submission to the COM with several points which were considered important also for the national discussion around cost benefit analysis, health and safety, training, skills etc. COM responded positively on one hand however, it also stated that that much can not be done and COM was not looking at this now. COM added that if we would like to these issues again in the context of the consultation on smart grids, the Social Partners could resubmit the the joint statement. Eurelectric agreed saying that it would be interesting to state again this messsage, the secretariats shall have the duty to resend the letter. It was further mentioned regarding the letter from Mr. Lowe, DG ENER that the last sentence of the first paragraph was not good. It gives the impression that DG ENER, in this case Mr. Lowe in particular are rather negative towards the electricity sector. We consider that as Social Partners we are partners of DG ENER/COM EPSU/EMCEF agreed. For the plenary session in December more attention should be drawn to how joint recommendations are implemented on national and local level. It was suggested that a national representative shall be invited for this session to discuss how they use the equal opportunities toolkit. Chairman concluded and closed the meeting mentioning that this would be a great idea, it would be great to have a presentation on this in the committee - how this works on the national level, in Italy or other countries. It will thus be scheduled for the December session.