[ad_1]
meStopping construction of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline in response to the poisoning of Russian opposition politician Alexei Navalny could be costly for taxpayers. “The project was approved by all responsible bodies in the EU, including the national authorities of Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Finland,” said Oliver Hermes, Chairman of the German Eastern Business Committee.
“Currently it is not possible to say which claims for damages would result from a possible termination ban and then would have to be clarified in court in the event of a case.” First, the legally binding planning approval decision applies. If the courts award companies that have already invested in the construction of Nord Stream 2 claims for damages, the state could face billions in claims.
In German politics, however, a debate has erupted over stopping the project, which has been controversial for years. After Chancellor Heiko Maas (SPD) indirectly threatened consequences for Nord Stream 2 due to the Navalny poisoning at the weekend, the chancellor agreed on Monday not to rule out sanctions against the pipeline.
Angela Merkel (CDU) is of the opinion “that it is wrong to exclude something,” her spokeswoman said. Maas had said: “I don’t expect the Russians to force us to change our position on Nord Stream 2.” Until now, the German government has supported the construction of the pipeline.
Twelve billion euros for the construction of the pipeline
The Nord Stream 2 consortium, which is promoting the construction, does not want to commit to claiming damages if the project is stopped. A spokesperson in an interview with WELT also declined to answer the question whether the consortium would consider it legally permissible to suspend or finish construction.
“As project developers, we cannot comment on political debates,” he said simply. The pipeline was 94 percent ready and built on the basis of national and international permits.
In total, it is about twelve billion euros, which only went to the construction of Nord Stream 2 and an oil pipeline for subsequent transport to the Czech Republic. “The sanctions could directly affect more than 120 companies from more than twelve European countries,” the spokesman said.
“We are convinced that the quickest possible commissioning of the pipeline is in the interest of Europe’s energy security, European consumers, the EU’s economic competitiveness and climate protection commitments.”
A large amount should be paid in case of doubt
The damage that the taxpayer might have to pay could be significantly greater. After all, it is not just about the money already invested in construction, but also about the revenue expected by future pipeline operators. “An additional, even greater burden would arise from the failure of expected natural gas supplies,” warns Hermes of the Eastern Committee in an interview that was posted on the committee’s website.
The question would then be from which sources the gas required to save the phase-out of coal and nuclear power and the desired transition to the non-fossil era in Germany should come. “In any case, gas supply in the market would be less than we expected and prices would be higher for natural gas customers,” Hermes said. “Here too it is about billions a year, which European consumers in particular would have to pay.”
The Greens are demanding that the suspension be applied regardless of possible claims for damages or additional costs. “Yes, that would be a great deal. Yes, it would have to be paid in case of doubt, “said party leader Annalena Baerbock on ZDF. She also noted that a number of legal issues related to the operation of the gas pipeline from Russia to Germany had not been clarified: “Those who invested there also ran the risk that this was not legally sealed. . ”
Therefore, one should not avoid demolishing Nord Stream 2 now. The leader of the AfD parliamentary group, Alexander Gauland, called the debate about the end of Nord Stream 2, however, “irresponsible”. Although no German national was involved in the Navalny case, “measures against Russia are being seriously considered that would have negative consequences for Germany and its citizens,” she said.
In the Eastern Committee, no unclear legal situation can be seen, as Baerbock put it at stake: “Nor do we see that this approval can be questioned retrospectively, because that would mean that ongoing projects would be initiated according to the political climate. general. and it could be turned off, ”Hermes said. “This would place a considerable burden on the image of the EU and Germany as a previously safe place of investment.”
