Brussels, 05/07/2012 (Agence Europe) - MEPs were united in Strasbourg, on Thursday 5 July, in expressing their disappointment at the outcome of the Rio+20 summit on sustainable development (20-22 June). The statement from the summit, “The Future we want”, bore no relation to their expectations as it contains not one single legally binding target and no timetable that could lead the planet to a green economy and the eradication of poverty (see EUROPE 10641). Their harsh assessment of this major meeting, to which the European Parliament (EP) declined to send a delegation because of the cost implications in this time of crisis, contrasted with the more measured view from EU Environment Commissioner Janez Ptotocnik.
The commissioner thanked the MEPs who took part in the summit at their expense and conceded that the final statement was less ambitious than hoped for by the EU which wanted to set a timetable towards tangible objectives and to have the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) transformed into a genuine global environmental agency, but that was not the direction taken. It was the need for proper implementation and the urgency of the situation that explains why the EU ultimately backed the text, he said. No country achieved the objectives it had set itself in Rio, he went on. There was agreement on lots of useful points, and now the emphasis must be put on implementation, he said. Whether the Rio conference was a success or not will depend on what is done with the final statement. The commissioner said he was counting on the EP “to keep the ambition and positive energy generated in the run up to Rio alive in the years to come at international, national and local level”. The clock is ticking, he said, but there was nothing to prevent the EU from acting.
On behalf of the EPP Group, Karl-Heinz Florenz (Germany), who did not go to Rio, expressed his group's disappointment, asking how it was possible that conclusions had been tied up beforehand. He called for ways to be considered for the future that will allow those who wish to press on.
For the S&D Group, Vittorio Prodi (Italy) regretted that no legally binding objectives had been set and said he was “much less optimistic” than the commissioner. “No Obama and no Merkel, what does that mean? They are the only ones who can take decisions. The flames are right there and we are doing nothing to tackle them!” he exclaimed. He also stressed the need to ensure “fairness in access to natural resources”.
Speaking for the ALDE Group, Gerban-Jan Gerbrandy (Netherlands), who did take part in the summit, suggested that “the EU was isolated in Rio. This was for two reasons: the developed world does not want to review its level of ambition on growth, and Rio+20 was more a social summit than one on sustainability”. She said that bilateral partnerships were needed with countries which want to green their economy and priority has to be given to trade relations with those countries. She also called for a bottom-up approach with greater involvement by companies “since the top-down approach has not worked”.
On behalf of the Greens/EFA Group, Sandrine Bélier (France) described the summit as a “major jump on the spot” and regretted the delay of any commitment until 2015. Thanking the EU and Potocnik for carrying the torch of a shift to a greener future, she felt, nonetheless, that in Rio “we failed to lead by example”. She also called for the EU to look for innovative funding, make progress on ecological taxation and end use of fossil energy. “Sugar cane will have to take off in the EU”, said Marina Yannakoudakis, for the ECR.
Speaking for the GUE/NGL Group, Kartika Liotard (Netherlands) regretted and said it was ridiculous that, in Rio, nothing was agreed on deforestation. Her Portuguese group colleague João Ferreira said the conference had delivered nothing new: “We witnessed the same blockages and the same contradictions at the Rio+20 summit as in past summits”. The only difference is that “they've pulled the vague and ill-defined 'green economy' concept out of the hat”. However, he notes, “genuinely sustainable development based on a sustainable relationship between man and nature will not be possible without questioning the law sand tenets of capitalism”. (AN/transl.rt)