Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-25-Speech-3-254"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001025.11.3-254"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Let me first of all thank the rapporteur, Mr Moreira Da Silva, who has produced two excellent reports on our current climate change strategy. Let me also express my appreciation for the continued importance the European Parliament attaches to the global problem of climate change. I welcome the comprehensive debate on this issue today. This debate is particularly opportune as key decisions are to be taken only four weeks from now at the sixth conference of the parties to the Convention on Climate Change – the so-called COP6 – in The Hague.
I am pleased to note that the Commission is supported by Parliament and the Council in its efforts to build up an effective European climate change programme. The opinion of the European Parliament's Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy on this programme stresses that policies and measures should be the priority of EU climate change strategy. It is important that this strategy is endorsed by all stakeholders and that is why the Commission has embarked on this multi-stakeholder process in the framework of the climate change programme.
The Environment Council recently adopted conclusions on policies and measures to limit emissions of greenhouse gases, confirming the choices made in the framework of the European climate change programme.
At the same time they indicate some specific priorities in the transport, energy efficiency and industry sectors that should be developed, taking into account the environmental impact and cost-effectiveness of these measures. These suggestions will be carefully considered in the ongoing work in the European Climate Change Programme. As you know, the programme is up and running and the six existing working groups – flexible mechanisms, energy supply, energy consumption, transport, industry and research have been operational since last June. Right from the start the European Climate Change Programme has been a challenging integration exercise bringing together Commission services, industry, NGOs and national experts. The first impression is certainly positive after the first four months. A constructive attitude has developed in the different groups.
A progress report on this programme will be the basis for my oral presentation at the special Climate Council on 7 November. Despite the very short time available, the programme is already suggesting a first list of likely measures in all the relevant sectors. The promotion of combined heat and power and of renewables, the encouragement of the switch to fuels with a low carbon content, support for energy efficiency in buildings, awareness-raising in transport, improvements in light-duty vehicles, measures to control leakage and the recovery of fluorinated gases are among the preliminary proposals emerging from the European Climate Change Programme.
At the end of its consultative process, by next summer, the Climate Change Programme will have given impetus and will have accelerated existing proposals. But, at the same time, it will have promoted new ideas. Therefore, this Climate Change Programme is a unique opportunity to bring together all the elements of an ambitious EU climate change strategy and the Commission will follow-up by finalising the most promising proposals.
On the Green Paper on emissions trading, I would like to thank Members for having considered it so substantively. The Commission is eager to hear the views of stakeholders and of course those of the European Parliament. Differences of opinion on the details should be expected when approaching a new instrument in environment policy and I warmly welcome the supportive and constructive attitude that Parliament has taken.
Emissions trading is a new concept and there is understandable mistrust in some quarters. I hope that the Green Paper has gone some way towards overcoming this mistrust.
Emissions trading within the European Union would be another policy measure that would coexist with other policy measures that are now in place or are being developed by the Commission in the context of the Climate Change programme. The Commission is not putting all its eggs in one basket. Significantly reducing emissions will require a whole range of policies and measures. For the purposes of furthering the discussions within the European Union, the Commission outlined a vision of how emissions trading would work. It was most certainly not a definitive outline. While it might be felt that the Green Paper was weighted towards given options, the Commission's motives are primarily to have an open mind towards this new instrument and to advocate a prudent, cautious, stepwise development of emissions trading within the EU. It was this caution that prevented the Commission from envisaging from the outset that all greenhouse gases and other sectors, including the transport and household sectors, should be subject to emissions trading.
Ultimately a scheme that is shown to work can be extended, but first the system has to prove itself. I do not think that emissions trading favours nuclear power more than any of the other climate change measures that are being considered within the European climate change programme. It is not envisaged that nuclear power will be included in an emissions trading scheme. The case for getting started by 2005 remains as strong as ever so that the Community can benefit from learning and by doing. Indeed Member States are already moving and the Community's common interest should be kept at the forefront of our minds. Moreover, it is my intention – and I have already had talks on this last October – to involve the central and eastern European countries in any future emissions trading regime.
Finally, the responses to the Green Paper that have been received so far – about 50 in number – reflect the high level of interest in this instrument. Opinions on what to do next vary and the Commission will decide how to move forward within the next few months, after the submissions have been analysed in more detail and when we know the results of COP6. It has always been and remains the Commission's wish that whatever the Community does on emissions trading should be fully compatible with the Kyoto Protocol's emissions trading system when it comes into effect. As you know, the EU system would come into force in 2005 while the Kyoto international trading would not come into force until later.
As you know, the European Union strongly supports the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol by 2002 at the latest, which will mean Rio plus ten years. The European Union intends to ratify the protocol as soon as COP6 is successfully concluded with decisions that safeguard the environmental integrity and credibility of the protocol. To achieve this, it is essential for the European Union to play a strong and proactive leadership role. In this regard I would summarise the main objectives of the EU for COP6 as follows.
In conclusion, I can express general support for your resolutions and I should once again like to express my thanks and appreciation for the constructive efforts made by Parliament to raise awareness of climate change and the support it gives to the Commission on implementation.
First of all, we need to ensure that action is taken at home by industrialised countries. Industrialised countries emit most greenhouse gases and have a responsibility to show leadership in tackling climate change. The outcome at COP6 should ensure this by balancing the use of Kyoto mechanisms such as emissions trading with domestic action – supplementarity – and by addressing the need to demonstrate progress on policies for reducing emissions by 2005.
Secondly, we need to make sure that the Kyoto targets are respected. Industrialised countries agreed on reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol. To ensure these targets are met we need to agree at COP6 on a solid framework of rules for the Kyoto mechanisms and a strong and effective compliance system. These are necessary to make the mechanisms work effectively because markets can only work efficiently in a solid institutional framework.
Thirdly, with regard to keeping the targets meaningful, the European Union has serious concerns about the inclusion of sinks because of the scientific and other uncertainties and risks associated with them. It also has concerns about the potential scale of sinks because this affects the need for action by industrialised countries to reduce their emissions. Unless these concerns are met, we cannot agree to include additional forestry and land use activities other than afforestation, deforestation and reforestation. Sinks should not be included in the CDM – the clean development mechanism – because this is a mechanism that should be used to bring social and economic development to countries.
Fourthly, we need to address the needs of developing countries and the economies in transition by promoting capacity building, transfer of technology and assistance for adaptation.
In this regard, the needs of the least developed countries merit particular attention. At COP6 we should develop these issues and agree that the clean development mechanism should be based on safe, environmentally sound technologies which will help these countries develop in a less polluting way.
I welcome the participation of Members of the European Parliament in the Community delegation to COP6. A final decision concerning the number of MEPs to attend COP6 is expected by 31 October; the Commission has proposed that the European Parliament be represented by eight Members. Taking into account the institutional rules for such participation, these Members can attend plenary meetings, and I can assure you that my staff and I will do our utmost to inform all Members present at COP6 on the negotiations which are not open to observers, on a regular basis. I can also give a commitment to organise an appropriate briefing before COP6 starts, maybe between 7 and 11 November, if possible – we will try to arrange that in the best possible way.
Let me also comment on the question about ratification without the United States. The European Union is very committed to the ratification and entry into force of the protocol by 2002 at the latest. On every occasion we urge the other parties, particularly the US and Russia, also to start preparing for ratification. While theoretically the protocol can enter into force without the US ratifying, it would clearly be the second best option not to have the world's biggest emitter of greenhouse gases included in the regime. Also, this would most likely have significant effects for EU competitiveness."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples