Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-10-20-Speech-1-235"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081020.20.1-235"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, this report is a response to the Global Climate Change Alliance, which was launched by the European Commission towards the end of last year. Basically, the Global Climate Change Alliance is a very good initiative. It is, first and foremost, a recognition that low-income countries will be seriously at risk because of climate change.
The Development report deals with the issues mentioned – and many others – in the spirit of supporting the European Commission initiative and with the primary aim of strengthening it, both in terms of substance and finance.
It is an irony that, only eight years ago, the Millennium Development Goals were agreed upon in New York. There was hardly any mention of climate change, yet it was obvious – already then – that many low-income countries would suffer badly from the adverse effects of climate change.
The way we are organised, however, in national organisations, in governments etc. – climate change on its track, development cooperation on another track – was already a real impediment or hindrance towards fully recognising the threat of climate change to development and poverty reduction.
The challenge is, of course, great. In order to assist low-income countries in adaptation and risk reduction and in mitigation efforts, and to look for synergies between the two, there must be a special focus on deforestation and then, finally and most importantly, implementing all these concerns in the context of development planning and poverty reduction.
It is crucial that we do not end up with a series of stand-alone adaptation projects. Rather, we have to mainstream adaptation and risk reduction into development cooperation.
The big question when we discussed this in the Committee on Development was how to finance this. The Commission proposal entails only EUR 60 million. It is a drop in the ocean. Nobody knows how much adaptation risk reduction will cost; nobody knows what technological cooperation will cost in terms of mitigation. The World Bank, Oxfam, UNDP and others have come up with estimates ranging between USD 10 billion and, I would say, USD 100 billion yearly. Some measures need not cost more: if you do development planning and poverty reduction strategies taking into account the adverse effects of climate change at the beginning, you may not end up with increased costs. But in many areas we know that there will be additional costs. Farming practices, risk reduction for extreme weather events, sea level rise, health measures: you name it.
The question is: where will the extra or additional funding come from? In the report we make a few suggestions. One of them, quite naturally, is to use some of the revenue from the expected auctioning of emission permits in the future. It is very important to somehow earmark funding for developing countries in this context.
Another suggestion is that Member States should support the Commission initiative and not embark on their own initiatives. This is a new area, where it makes sense to pool resources.
Finally, all that we do in this area must be seen in the context of next year’s climate negotiations in Copenhagen. Proactive action from Annex 1 countries – in particular the EU – in this field is crucial for a global deal to be struck."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples