Kist Committee presents unbundling evaluation report

On Monday, 20 March 2006, the Kist Committee presented its evaluation report on the unbundling of the Dutch energy companies. 

Kist Committee presents unbundling evaluation report

At the request of the Standing Parliamentary Committee for Economic Affairs, the Kist Committee attempted in three weeks to validate all the discussions and research of the past three years relating to the bill for unbundling the energy companies. An exacting task in such a short period, which a detailed study of the report clearly reveals. 

Revenue and costs
Many of the assumptions of the Kist Committee about increased revenue do not hold water. For example, the Committee credits the unbundling with certain benefits that have nothing to do with it (for example, future possible privatisation of the energy companies and the transfer of high-voltage networks). 

The key cost-saving assumption of the Kist Committee is equally unfounded, given that the bill definitely envisages the setting up of a separate fully equipped network operator as part of the unbundling. Hence, the cost of putting this organisation in place is also attributable to the unbundling. 

CBLs
Regarding cross-border leases (CBLs), the Kist Committee accepts Essent´s analyses, but draws back from making a firm statement on the size of the potential claims. This means that the Lower House still has no clear picture of the financial costs and benefits of the unbundling in relation to the CBLs, although this was specifically requested by the Lower House. The energy sector is therefore still facing potential claims. 

Moreover, the provincial shareholders of Essent (who together hold around 74% of the shares) on 20 March 2006 spoke out unanimously against the unbundling. 

Status
To make things perfectly clear, no decision was taken by the Lower House on 20 March 2006. That can only be done in a full session, possibly preceded by a legislative debate. No date has been announced for this yet. 

For the record, after the Lower House has reached an affirmative decision, the bill has to be presented to the Upper House. This body can still vote against it. 

We will keep you informed on further developments via our website. 

Published: 21 March 2006