Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-11-12-Speech-1-206"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20071112.21.1-206"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, first of all I would like to thank all the speakers in tonight’s debate for their positive contributions and I would like to turn to the details of some of the amendments.
The Commission can support fully, in part, or in principle 27 amendments: Numbers 1, 3-5, 7, 8, 10, 14, 17, 26, 29, 30, 36-38, 40, 45, 47, 49, 51-53, 57, 65, 70, 76, 79.
The amendments which the Commission cannot support are Numbers 2, 6, 9, 11-13, 15, 16, 18-25, 27, 28, 31-35, 39, 41-44, 46, 48, 50, 54-56, 58-60, 61-64, 66-69, 71-75, 77, 78, 80-100.
There are many amendments that are acceptable, at least in part or in principle. For example, the Commission accepts that it would be useful to require aircraft operators to develop monitoring and reporting plans. Operators in the current scheme must also do this to obtain a greenhouse gas permit. This will facilitate credible verification and thus safeguard the environmental integrity of the scheme by preventing fraud.
Other examples include the exemption of certain activities such as humanitarian or firefighting flights. However, while I fully agree that we need to get started as soon as possible, a 2010 start date would be very challenging. There would be insufficient time to complete the preparatory work and, in particular, to complete the allocation process which requires more lead time than the process used in the current system.
Regarding the scope, I have already explained why the Commission still believes a two-step approach would be helpful to convince third countries that the European Union is ready to take the lead, consistent with our special obligations as a region of developed countries.
Regarding the call for more auctioning, I am well aware that this is in line with the growing consensus about the advantages of auctioning and I expect we will soon discuss this a lot more in the context of the general ETS review. However, in the period before 2013, aviation should be treated as much as possible like other sectors.
The share of allowances auctioned should therefore be the average percentage of auctioning applicable to other sectors, as laid down in the national allocation plans for 2008-2012. What happens after 2012 should depend on the general review of the ETS.
Finally, I will share with you some concerns we have regarding amendments that relate to limits on the use of non-aviation credits, to the use of a multiplier for non-carbon dioxide effects and to an additional energy efficiency factor. These amendments all have the effect of limiting the possibility of aviation operators to use allowances, other than aviation allowances, to cover their emissions. This is not consistent with the fundamental idea of open emissions trading, which is what ensures cost-effective solutions. Moreover, these changes would complicate the scheme significantly.
The Commission’s proposal already provides aircraft operators with extra incentives to improve fuel efficiency. There is, in our view, no need for additional features that will just make it more complicated.
In summary, the Commission can support 27 of the 100 proposed amendments fully, in part or in principle. I will give Parliament’s secretariat a list detailing the Commission’s position on the amendments, including Amendment 47 for which I would like to say that the Commission will maintain the provisions which foresee a change of the registry regulation, but is open to consider ways to ensure that conversion of aviation allowances does not burden Member States’ compliance with a Kyoto target."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Liese report (A6-0402/2007 ) A6-0402/2007"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples