SPEAKING in the Netherlands’ lower house in The Hague last week, the new head of the Eurogroup Jeroen Dijsselbloem said that revenues from natural gas could be included in calculations to make the Cyprus debt sustainable. Proceeds from the sale of gas, he said, could be paid into a separate account that could be used to service the national debt, adding, however that certain questions needed to be answered first.
Before that gas was included in the programmes, the drillings had to be completed and the quantities and the quality of the gas had to be established, said Dijsselbloem. This was a pretty sensible response regarding the Cyprus bailout, which would have to be approved by the Dutch parliament. It was perfectly understandable that MPs sought explanations of how we would be repaying our loan and that the head of the Eurogroup wanted to assure them that revenue from natural gas would go towards paying it off.
Dijsselbloem’s comments were slammed in Cyprus on the grounds that the Europeans wanted to take control of our natural gas resources, a claim that we have heard on countless occasions from our politicians. Their argument is that taking decisions jointly with the troika on hydrocarbons would be undermining the country’s sovereignty, which is a correct observation, but a statement of the obvious.
Just like the shareholders of a business which is being saved from bankruptcy by the bank relinquish control of decision-making so does a state in the same predicament. Were we under the impression that our lenders would allow us to take the revenue from hydrocarbons and spend it on pay rises in the public sector or on building new roads, while owing billions to them?
This would not happen anywhere in the world and commerce minister Neoclis Sylikiotis was being disingenuous in attempting to make out there was a foreign scheme aimed at preventing Cyprus playing a bigger political role in the region and in Europe by using its natural wealth. The truth is that the Europeans are looking for ways to ensure that Cyprus’ debt would not be unsustainable, as this would cause big problems both for the island and the euro-zone. If accounting for the hydrocarbon revenues would make the debt sustainable, would it be such a bad thing?
Giving a say to the troika over the management and exploitation of hydrocarbons is not the disaster Sylikiotis claims either. The troika has as much of an incentive in monetising our gas finds as we do, because the repayment of our debt would be guaranteed in this way. In fact its participation in the decision-making could help us develop a rational energy policy, something our politicians have, so far, failed to do.