Patupchyk Fails To Agree With Russia On Gas
4- 17.05.2016, 17:10
- 8,477
PHOTO: CTV.BY
Belarus and Russia will discuss gas prices once again by the end of this month.
The next negotiations are planned to be held also in Moscow in May, as Minister of Energy of the Republic of Belarus Uladzimir Patupchyk has informed to the journalists upon the results of his meeting with the Russian colleague Alexander Novak, TASS reports.
“We have no debts before the Russian party and we are asking for no discounts for gas. We are asking to follow the normative and legal base. This remains a very delicate issue, we sit and work on all the questions. They heard us today. This pleases. The next meeting is coming soon. We will meet here, in Moscow. Our position is absolutely clear and transparent. It hasn’t changed. It seems that Russia starts to hear us and to understand what we ask for “, — he said.
Answering the question whether the new meeting will take place this month, Patupchyk said yes.
We remind, today, on May 17, Belarusian Minister of Energy Uladzimir Paptupchyk started for Moscow to meet with his Russian colleague Alexander Novak to discuss gas issues. Last week, Novak stated that Russia had no plans to provide any discounts for gas to Belarus yet. Now, the price for gas for our country makes USD 132 per 1 000 cubic meters.
Russia assessed Belarus’ gas debts since the beginning of the year to April as USD 125 million. Minsk refused to recognize this debt, claiming that the fair price would be USD 73 per 1 000 cubic meters of gas, tut.by reports.
Recently, the Belarusian “daughter” of Gasprom appealed to the International Arbitrary Court on the premises of the Belarusian Commercial and Industrial Chamber with a court claim against the gas-supplying organizations in Belarus in connection with existence of a debt from the side of regional gas structures regarding payment for the shipped natural gas.
Patupchyk, in his turn, claimed that Belarus had no debt before Gasprom and that the country paid for gas in accordance with the intergovernmental agreement, but the parties interpreted it differently.
