Conas a fheiceann an tsochaí shibhialta #StateOfTheEnergyUnion

The Energy Union initiative, which was launched three years ago and has a broad range of policy measures, has generated a lot of public attention. While it has inspired some to talk of Europe's fifth freedom and a panacea against Euroscepticism, others have felt compelled to fixate upon the technical and legal details of network codes, interconnectors, and intergovernmental agreements, writes Pierre Jean Coulon, president of the European Economic and Social Committee's section for transport, energy, infrastructure, and the information society.

The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) has found itself in both camps: on the one hand, it has been inspired by the project, which reflects the Committee's instrumental role since 2010 in developing Jacques Delors' and Jerzy Buzek's original vision of a European Energy Community; on the other hand, it has immersed itself in the details of the European Commission's sectoral proposals.

Over the last three years, the Committee's members have produced more than 25 opinions about the Energy Union, reviewing the Commission's proposals through the eyes of the following stakeholders: companies engaged in energy-intensive industries; social housing organisations; energy utilities companies; trade unions; environmental NGOs; consumer advocates; academics; farmers; and other directly affected stakeholders. The Committee's opinions have dealt with security of gas supply, electricity market design, energy prosumers, energy efficiency, energy performance of buildings, heating and cooling, vulnerable consumers, and renewables, to name but a few.

Proposals within the opinions include institutional innovations such as a request for a European energy information service, but also instrumental demands such as additional impact assessments to be carried out in relation to the amendment of the gas market Directive, complementary interconnectivity indicators for the regional level, or measures to facilitate the development of decentralized electricity trading structures. The Committee's views also displayed an awareness of the multi-dimensionality of the energy transformation process, which will involve changes to the transport and digital sectors as well.

Once a year, however, the members have had the opportunity to take a step back and obtain a broader perspective of the Energy Union, on the occasion of the publication of the annual State of the Energy Union report produced by the Commission. The EESC has then been asked to produce an opinion: in other words, to express civil society's perspective on the state of the Energy Union. Three Commission reports and three EESC opinions have been published so far, dealing with progress reporting for the years 2015, 2016 and 2017.

In its opinion on the State of the Energy Union report from 2015, the Committee – based on the work of rapporteur Stephane Buffetaut from France – expressed its strong support for the idea of an Energy Union and welcomed the annual progress reporting. However, it also raised concerns about the support and involvement of civil society in the Energy Union process as well as regarding energy transition. In particular, the Committee called for a stronger political vision and will to pursue the Energy Union. Members were also concerned about the notable absence of the social dimension in the Energy Union, as well as systematic measurements of social progress in energy transition. Finally, the opinion stressed the need to ensure the systematic participation of a wide range of stakeholders in the Energy Union process and proposed to this end a European Energy Dialogue.

As regards the State of the Energy Union in 2016, the EESC – drawing on the work of rapporteur Tellervo Kylä-Harakka-Ruonala from Finland – took a closer look at the reporting on the occasion of the State of the Energy Union report. Assessments of progress should be anchored in the everyday life of citizens, the variety of ways they use energy services, and the effects on their lives of changes to the energy systems, rather than focusing on national political and aggregate economic accomplishments. Such reporting could inform and facilitate the European Energy Dialogue and help sharpen the reporting on the social dimension of the energy transition. Moreover, members felt that it was necessary to systematically evaluate low-carbon policy instruments with a view to their effects on prices, so as to provide the right signals to market participants.

Aiseolas

In its most recent opinion evaluating the Energy Union project's progress in 2017, the Committee – engaging with the work of rapporteurs Toni Vidan from Croatia and Christophe Quarez from France – welcomes some of the changes in the EU policy debate as well as the concrete proposals regarding citizens' involvement in the Energy Union and the social dimension. Citizen involvement is to some extent written into the proposals for the Governance of the Energy Union put forward by the European Commission and the corresponding report by the European Parliament, while the recognition of the importance of the social dimension can be observed thanks to the establishment of the EU Energy Poverty Observatory and the Coal Regions in Transition Platform. Nevertheless, as expressed in the opinion, the EESC would like to see more progress made on these fronts, such as the establishment of an accessible European energy information service, the announcement of a social pact for a citizen-driven energy transition, and the European energy transition adjustment fund.

What these opinions show is that the European Economic and Social Committee – as the voice of civil society in Brussels – wants to make sure that the Commission and other European decision-makers share and indeed pursue the vision spelled out at the beginning of the Energy Union initiative:

"Most importantly, our vision is of an Energy Union with citizens at its core, where citizens take ownership of the energy transition, benefit from new technologies to reduce their bills, participate actively in the market, and where vulnerable consumers are protected."

The decarbonization of energy systems can be delivered in different ways: energy supply can be dominated by decentralized energy cooperatives or the operation of large utilities, e.g. large-scale wind farms; ownership of installations can be held locally or by larger external investors; municipalities can assume varying roles, e.g. as owners of local utilities or passive bystanders; different fuel mixes can offer options for decarbonization, for instance including or excluding nuclear energy. These different paths lead to varying distributional outcomes, both in terms of the distribution of risks and benefits of the energy transition but also as regards whose voice is heard in Brussels and the capitals of the member states.

For the European Economic and Social Committee, the answer is clear: the Energy Union should be a Union for and of the people. To this end, the members of the Committee have consistently been arguing for information that empowers citizens to evaluate policies and their consequences for energy justice, risk trade-offs, market offers, energy service suppliers, and more, as well as for a European Energy Dialogue that would then allow informed citizens to voice their viewpoints, making sure that energy policies – with all their consequences for the well-being of Europe's citizens – are not left up to experts alone.

Such a dialogue needs to go beyond the Energy Union tour organized by Maroš Šefčovič, the vice-president of the European Commission, and the public consultation processes in relation to sectoral policies. It would require not only a concerted effort and a rethinking on the part of the services of the European Commission, but also the involvement of the MEPs, the Committee of the Regions, and the European Economic and Social Committee on the ground in their constituencies, home regions, and civil society organizations.

A first step, resulting from these joint efforts, could be to organise public debates in each of the member states and in Brussels on how people imagine Europe's energy future(s) and how their ideas may vary, both in Brussels and elsewhere, as well as between different groups within the same country.

Comhroinn an t-alt seo: