Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-05-10-Speech-2-190"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050510.22.2-190"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, once again I would like to thank Parliament for this opportunity to respond to some of the questions and for the discussion we had.
With regard to the merits and weaknesses, the advantages and disadvantages of being an optimist or pessimist, as suggested by Mr Wijkman and Mrs Westlund, on this issue one should not be an optimist or pessimist but a realist. We must try to work with all those who realise the importance of the problem, that the problem is a global one and needs a global solution.
With regard to the United States, mentioned by Mr Sjöstedt, Mrs Hassi and Mrs Korhola among others, I have to tell you that during our discussions with the United States authorities, we were very clear that we consider that cooperation in research and development of new technologies and the deployment of new technologies is very important, but we are not going to consider this a first step forward because it is something on which we in any case agree. No-one disagrees that we should use new technologies, as Mr Trakatellis said. We should deploy new technologies in order to fight climate change. That is something we have agreed. We should make progress. It is not progress if they agree at the G-8 or anywhere else that we will cooperate on development. That is not enough. We should take steps forward. That was made very clear to the United States because, as we correctly said earlier, other countries will refuse to cooperate and, after a few years, the developing countries of South Asia and South America and other developing countries will contribute more to the greenhouse phenomenon than the European Union and the United States combined. We need all countries to cooperate, to be on board. We will follow a common but differentiated policy because we cannot ask developing countries to contribute towards the reduction of emissions as much as the developed countries that have contributed far more up until now.
The Commission recognises the need for the European Union to maintain its leading role in international and also domestic efforts to fight climate change, as Mr Trakatellis said. The Commission highlighted in its communication of 9 February ‘Winning the battle against climate change’ that we should focus on leadership by example. Mr Prodi said that we have a moral duty to do so. One of the central recommendations was that the European Council should give a clear message that the European Union wishes to engage with other countries in an open dialogue on what further multilateral action is required to address the challenge of climate change.
Targets were mentioned. They have proved to be a very useful tool in environmental policy-making. They provide clear guidance to decision-makers in society. They are particularly useful to industry in the private sector. Thus, targets will continue to be a core element of any future climate policy regime. However, the timing of targets is very important. The exact timing should depend on the progress we make in building international support for starting negotiations on the future climate change regime. Once we have a mandate to start such negotiations, the European Union will need to consider putting forward the targets it is willing to set for the post-2012 period.
I should like to respond to the suggestion made by several speakers that the European Union should use trade measures to protect our industry or other measures to offset the competitive advantages of companies in countries that do not restrict their greenhouse gas emissions. The European Union’s climate policy has been carefully designed to minimise costs to industry. That is the reason we opted for emissions trading. Our goal should be to work towards a future climate regime that is not only a decisive step in winning our battle against climate change, but also allows us to do so in a way that strengthens our competitiveness in clean technologies. Such a regime will get us much further – also in climate terms – than trade sanctions.
With regard to the developing countries, I agree about the importance of assisting developing countries to adapt to the adverse effects of climate change. The European Union is the main contributor to the 2001 Bonn Political Declaration, which pledges USD 410 million per year in climate change funding for developing countries, starting this year. An important part of this will go to support adaptation measures. The European Union is also the main contributor to the Least Developed Countries Fund. Those countries have to face all the consequences of climate change, but they are not in a position to take the measures needed to adapt properly. It is our moral duty to work with them and help them. It is also in our interests, because in this way they will also contribute to reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
I should like to underline the importance of developing and deploying new technologies, including in developing countries. The Commission is identifying and implementing concrete actions. The Commission recently agreed with China on the setting-up of two new European Union-China action plans in the area of energy: one on clean coal and the other on renewable energy and energy efficiency for which the Commission has secured initial funding.
Once again, thank you for this opportunity to discuss the Bonn seminar and the forthcoming negotiations on the future international climate change regime. I am confident that Parliament will, as usual, play an important part in this debate. The Commission and Parliament have always been strong allies in this respect. I look forward to working with you in the future."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples