Vol. 400 No. 9
»
Debates
»
Find a debate
»
Dáil Éireann debate - Tuesday, 3 Jul 1990
»
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Compul...
18 Mr. Allen asked the Minister for Energy if the European Commission moves to challenge before the European Courts the arrangements for the compulsory purchase of oil from State refineries in Greece will have any implications for the similar arrangements which apply in Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I understand that the European Commission is in the process of taking action against the Greek authorities on a number of issues in the oil distribution and refining sectors. I would not wish to comment in detail on this matter as it may come before the European Court in the near future. I am confident, however, that there is no adverse implication for Ireland in this action.
I understand the Greeks are effectively operating a compulsory off-take regime very similar to ours and that the Commission is very confident that it will dislodge it. Will the Minister indicate how our case differs so much from the Greeks?
It is not true to say that the action taken by the EC against Greece is the same as the action that was taken against Whitegate in 1983. The European Court considered the Whitegate regime and in 1984 ruled that the system of mandatory purchases from Whitegate was justified on the grounds of public policy and public security. Furthermore, Whitegate is the sole refinery in Ireland. The situation in Greece is completely different. In Greece there is a mix of state owned and privately owned refineries, in other words there are a number of refineries, not just one, and they are in the public and private ownership. Whitegate is not in competition with other refineries but is run on a full cost recovery basis. The Commission's complaints with the Greek authorities deal with competition related to refineries and distribution and are far more fundamental and far reaching than the issues raised in the European Court relating to Whitegate in 1984.
