Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-09-11-Speech-2-046-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120911.5.2-046-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, honourable Members, to start with, I would like to say that of all our energy policy and environmental policy objectives, energy efficiency is the most under appreciated and, perhaps, even the most important issue. That is why, alongside our subsidy policy for renewable energy and alongside the general goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it was necessary for us to look at setting binding targets for energy efficiency – for us as the Commission to do so, but with substantial involvement from Parliament.
All in all, this is a good day. Bearing in mind that at European level – and that applies both to you and to us – we are still focusing almost entirely on the state debt crisis and the concerns regarding the euro, today’s draft legislation and your compromise result demonstrates that Europe can still shape things, can still act. There is nowhere else in the world that has made such binding progress on energy efficiency as we have in the European Union. I would like to thank everyone concerned once again.
Looking at the last two-and-a-half to three years, I note that the impetus to make energy efficiency a binding area of work for European energy policy did not come from the Council. It did indeed come from the European Council in 2007, but not since then. The national ministers tended to be reticent, some of them even unwilling, and were not prepared to have binding targets set. Parliament has pushed this.
I would like to thank you personally, Mr Turmes, along with those from the other groups who have been fighting for this. You have not just lobbied hard; you have also been skilful negotiators. After all, this whole issue is not just a matter of facts, dates and statistics. It is also a matter of diplomacy. It was on a knife edge, but it succeeded. You and the minister from Copenhagen, who is not here today and whom I would expressly like to thank, were mainly the ones responsible for a pragmatic, but, in fact, quite credible, success.
What is it all about? Firstly, we hope to bring about a reduction in imports of primary energy through energy efficiency – that means using energy well, reducing the amount of energy that is wasted, improving the use of energy and saving energy. Oil, gas, coal, biomass, uranium – the amount we import must not increase further as a result, but be limited instead.
Secondly, in the long term, we want to reduce our costs; in other words, the amount our citizens and our businesses have to spend on energy. Thirdly, we hope thereby to reduce emissions and make a contribution to stopping climate change. Fourthly, we also want to utilise the skills that our citizens have – engineering skills and trade skills – and thereby also secure and enhance jobs. Those are the four goals that make binding energy efficiency a sensible course of action at European level.
Looking at the Commission proposal, it did not go as far as many in Parliament had expected: that is to say, at the moment, we have not introduced a binding target. We have proposed binding measures and binding targets for some areas, public buildings and others. However, the proposal does not go as far as some Members of Parliament had expected.
Moreover, it was watered down somewhat in the course of the negotiations. Nonetheless, what we have on the table now that is to be debated and passed by you – and in the Council in parallel – is by no means mere empty words. It has substance that will be effective. With what we are currently proposing, we will essentially meet our 20% efficiency target. I am counting on the Member States to implement it on a one-to-one basis.
Not only that, however. We are also counting on there being Member States that do more. In other words, I would expressly like to mention today the idea of a competition. I think it would be terrific if, in two, three or four years’ time, we were able to note that the Member States were not just complying with binding European laws, but were exceeding them – were doing more. I would like to see a competition to find the best Member State that does more in respect of energy efficiency than is necessary under European law. Our work does not end here.
I see three tasks for the Commission. The first is checking implementation – implementation in the Member States and the progress reports, in other words, looking year by year to see whether we are making progress in reducing energy consumption. If so, where? If not, why not? We will then submit a progress report still under the current Barroso II Commission – in other words, before the end of our period of office in 2014 – to tell the next Commission, the next Parliament, either that things are proceeding successfully or that more needs to be done at European level by binding means. Then we will approach other sectors with other products by means of ecodesign and eco-labelling in order to be able to make further specific progress in this area, as announced previously."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples