Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-12-16-Speech-2-327"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081216.36.2-327"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, the cost of reducing carbon emissions and decoupling our economies from our fossil fuel dependency will be about 1% of GDP if we act and act decisively over the next 10 years.
The preparations for reaching the all-important international deal have already begun and the signing off of this climate package would restate the EU’s strong commitments to its targets and to living up to its responsibility to the developing world.
I have reiterated many times to the French presidency and there has always been a clear understanding between us that we would never let Parliament be presented with a fait accompli from the European summit. That was clear leading up to it. As rapporteur of the review of the European Union’s emissions trading system I would like to acknowledge the fact that the French presidency and the excellent team led by Ambassador Léglise-Costa understood that from day one. The issues that went in square brackets to the summit were within the parameters of what would have been acceptable to the European Parliament and to myself as rapporteur for the lead committee, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety.
So, for colleagues who doubt that codecision has been honoured, not only in the spirit of the law but in the letter of the law, let me assure them there were no surprises in what came back from the summit because all the issues and the parameters had been thoroughly thrashed out in five or six trialogues in advance of the summit.
If we postpone the decisions that we as politicians have been told by peer review scientists are essential to reach the 2°C maximum increase in global temperature, the cost will be at least 10% of GDP by 2020 and increase steeply as environmental tipping points will be tracked by financial ones.
Yes, energy-efficient and resource-efficient industries are also economically efficient and, yes, revolutionary change in the energy sector is what we need. We have absolutely no choice at all on that matter. The EU is the only region in the world that currently has a functioning emissions trading system and which has put a price on carbon and which is committed to a 20% unilateral reduction in our CO
emissions.
Effectively we have been the pilot project for the rest of the world, for other regions. Those other regions were developing their cap-and-trade systems and I look forward to the new US Administration’s proposal based on President-elect Obama’s election manifesto early in the New Year. It was confirmed to us by Senator John Kerry last week in Poznań that it would be no later.
I also welcome today’s draft ETS proposal from the Australian Government, using our ETS as a template, and I sincerely wish them well also.
I welcome the resolve and intent of the Chinese, the Indians and so many other countries in the industrialised and less-developed parts of the world to achieve the target of a serious reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, as opposed to business as usual.
It has been almost a year since the Commission adopted the climate and energy package and we have come a long way in those 11 months. The French presidency announced in July that this package would be their priority, and we have been working hard to deliver a deal together by the end of this year.
We are now within sight of the finishing line. Exceptional circumstances called for exceptional measures. All those involved in the EU institutions have clearly understood the need for Europe to drive this process forward and deliver it in time for the 15th meeting of the United Nations Convention on Climate Change next year in Copenhagen.
First-reading agreements, particularly on such complicated and technical issues, must not become the norm. I have great sympathy for colleagues who are criticising the timetable, as distinct from the substance of what we do. I am quite sure that, if the subject matter was otherwise, I would probably find myself agreeing with a lot of what they say. But in this instance we all know why. We have no choice; we know why the timetable is as it is."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"2"1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples