21
pressure.
13
There would be more pressure if individual companies were aware of each others performance. Studies of the agreements operation
reveal that this is an important incentive, provided it does not discourage energy savings Lokhorst, 2009, pp. 80-81. A big stick the government
taking more stringent measures if the agreements are not kept would also increase an agreements effect Dijkgraaf et al., 2009.
14
Multiyear agreements would also be more effective if the associated activities were
directed principally at medium-sized companies and at increasing their knowledge of energy savings.
Public procurement of sustainable products Companies are more inclined to take energy saving measures that
increase their market share. There is therefore more than one benefit from the government stimulating the market by procuring energy efficient
and low-CO
2
goods and services. We recommend that the Minister of Infrastructure and the Environment continue to execute a sustainable
procurement policy.
2.3.3 Stricter EU policy
National binding targets for energy saving The EU energy saving targets are not currently binding on the member
states. The European Commission has announced, however, that it will consider setting binding national savings targets if it is thought in 2013
that the EU energy saving goal will probably not be met by means of the member states energy efficiency measures. We recommend that the
government clarify the energy saving goals it has set. It should also call in Brussels for binding national goals for all member states. Binding
national goals would level the playing field between the member states as they would prevent some countries doing little and benefiting from the
steps taken by the others. Active implementation of EU directives
New and stricter directives on energy efficiency in the various energy sectors will be negotiated in the EU in the coming years.
15
The
13
The effect of the second generation of multiyear agreements is also due to their influence on two other key factors: the expected consequences of energy saving and the perceived feasibility.
14
Such a threat must be credible and the instrument must be effective. An international comparative study by Dijkgraaf et al. shows that energy taxes are the most effective instrumen t,
especially in combination with a mechanism to return the tax income back to industry so as not to distort competition.
15
The new European energy efficiency plan was issued in 2011. It includes new directives and a tightening up of existing directives in the years ahead. A white paper was issued for the transport
sector in March 2011. It, too, provides for new directives.
22
Netherlands should support the strictest possible formulation of the directives and their revised efficiency requirements. Furthermore, the
Netherlands should implement and enforce the European directives promptly and unconditionally. Only then can the Netherlands profit in full
from EU policy.
23
3 Response of the minister and
the Netherlands Court of Audits afterword
3.1 Response of the minister
The Minister of ELI responded to our audit on 6 September 2011. He wrote on behalf of the Ministers of the Interior and Kingdom Relations
BZK, Finance and IM. His response is summarised below; the full text can be read at www.rekenkamer.nl.
The Minister of ELI noted that some of our recommendations were consistent with policy developments launched by the government. The
House of Representatives would be informed of some of the initiatives soon. They include the Green Deal, the Local Climate Agenda and the
Sustainability Agenda. The minister also referred to the Minister of BZKs Built Environment Energy Saving Action Plan that was recently submitted
to the House BZK, 2011. The minister confirmed that the binding European goals on CO
2
reduction and the share of renewable energy were the guiding principles of the
governments energy and climate policy. Energy savings were a means to achieve these goals. The energy saving instruments applied by the
previous government would be continued and refined where necessary to strengthen their effectiveness.
The minister wrote that the Netherlands did not support separate binding national energy saving goals in addition to the renewable energy and CO
2
reduction goals. Such goals might require non-cost effective measures that would make the policy unnecessarily expensive. In this light, the
minister also responded to our recommendation that energy saving policy instruments should be selected so that their reasonably estimated impact
is adequate to achieve the policy goals and the instruments should be adapted if policy execution or impact is below expectations. Since the
government no longer sets a separate energy saving target, the minister thinks this recommendation is no longer appropriate.
