Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-01-10-Speech-1-051"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050110.12.1-051"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I too should like to start with a word of thanks to Mr Florenz for his leadership of the delegation, to Mr Dimas and the Dutch Presidency for the pleasant working relationship.
I should like to start off with the North Pole, which is warming up faster than expected: glaciers are melting, permafrost is defrosting, and forestry boundaries are shifting. People on the North Pole are now forced to change their lifestyles to be compatible with warming. Societies on the North Pole are experiences on a small scale what the world as a whole will soon be dealing with. We are facing the twofold task of adjusting to climate change and at the same time keeping it to a minimum.
Given this enormous challenge, the outcome of the Climate Conference in Buenos Aires is particularly disappointing. It is, of course, a good thing that it was possible to keep the Kyoto process just on track thanks to a seminar. It is, of course, a good thing that the European Union has its own way, and that the outcome can be anticipated at this seminar, but it is all insubstantial, pathetically so.
We also have to conclude that the EU is becoming increasingly isolated. Naturally, a number of American states are prepared to set to reducing the emission of greenhouse gases and there is indeed interest in our system of tradable emission allowances. It is also true that few scientists these days deny that mankind has an influence on the climate. We have to count our blessings, but the essence of Buenos Aires is that the sense of urgency that is felt in Europe is not shared in other parts of the world. I wonder why this is so. Is it that the US administration does not feel a sense of responsibility ? Is it a lack of insight on the part of the rest of the world or a lack of diplomatic skill on our part? Are our powers of persuasion failing us?
Unfortunately, we are bound to conclude that the EU did not have the influence that was required. Binding objectives after 2012 are worth striving for, but they have, unfortunately, become a European hobbyhorse. The EU will need to be extremely well prepared for the seminar in the spring. There is also a need for practical proposals, which requires leadership and powers of persuasion but, above all, courage. Sound, productive and well-founded proposals need to be tabled without delay. The EU will also need to be open to approaches adopted in other countries. I can distinguish at least three solutions which we all need to explore.
First of all, we need to focus more on making adjustments and helping developing countries, in particular, to make them. The contributions of African and Central American delegations in Buenos Aires all started with accounts of unpleasant climate changes. Adjustment is not easy, but it should certainly be about more than aid when major disasters strike. Lifestyle adjustment is fundamental, and credible programmes need to be set up to that end.
Secondly, there is the transfer of technology, into which we must put all our efforts, abandoning our ideological reserve about the clean development mechanism.
Thirdly, we will need to expend far less energy on a national approach and national objectives, and instead focus on the objectives for each sector. In the talks that our delegation has held, the sectoral approach was considered a viable route. We will need to put our heads together with the steel, cement and paper industries. Competition in those sectors is worldwide, and worldwide objectives based on the best suitable technology are the obvious way ahead. The WTO can play a role in this."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples