Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-03-15-Speech-4-070-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120315.6.4-070-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The Commission is right to make long-term plans for the EU to have a genuinely competitive low-carbon policy by 2050. It seems odd, however, that the many targets which the Commission has proposed, and which some of my fellow Members support, will do just the opposite for the EU, especially when we consider the global realities. In all the steps we take, we need first of all to examine what is happening in the area of international climate policy. If we now decide on unilateral action to make emissions cuts by up to 95%, through action not bound by any international climate agreement or linked to any equivalent emissions cuts in third countries, we will arrive at a situation where competitiveness is just a distant dream.
The symptoms of our climate policy are already visible, both in the economy and in our employment situation, and there are no real environmental benefits either. In the long term, we should not get locked into what are already expensive solutions or work out our plans based on them. We should instead endeavour to create for our industry an operational environment that encourages investment and innovation in more efficient technology. Additional, unilateral commitments are not an incentive, when we realise that our emissions represent around 11% of the total globally. They will stifle our economy. That is why, in the report before us, I am concerned about the desire to intervene artificially in emissions trading and to manipulate allowance trading prices politically. This would be a very dangerous move, which would render our industry completely incapable of planning any measures in the climate policy environment that we would be creating, and it certainly would not encourage technological development.
Emissions trading is working in accordance with its aims – to reduce emissions. With a tighter emissions ceiling, emissions would fall as planned, and the arm’s length price would be determined with reference to each economic situation. The incentives for moving to new, more efficient technology are created by offering the opportunity for innovation, and not by taking it away by tightening the screws."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples