Meeting in their first plenary session in Strasbourg since the Trump Administration's decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, the European Parliament seemed divided on Tuesday 13 June as to the level of ambition of crucial legislation for the EU's implementation of this universal agreement: the EU's draft regulation on contributing to the fight against climate change in sectors not covered by the emissions trading system (ETS) for quotas.
While everyone is determined to ensure the EU respects the Paris Agreement, the debate on this draft regulation (which aims at a 30% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, compared with 2005, in sectors outside the ETS contributing to 60% of the EU's total emissions – transport, agriculture, buildings and waste) showed a split between left and right in the Parliament's hemicycle. The right calls for realism, while the left wants to keep to the ambitious vote of the environment committee, which strengthened the Commission's proposal to bring the deadline for starting the reductions to 2018, and to avoid certain loopholes, especially by capping Lulucf flexibility (see EUROPE 11798).
ALDE, EPP and ECR MEPs submitted joint amendments, which in their view represent a good compromise to be able to make full use of the ability of forests to absorb CO², and to help countries that have a strong agricultural sector with not much potential for cutting emissions to reach their objective. These amendments aim at increasing to 280 million tonnes the flexibility enabling forest credits to be used (the environment committee had capped this at 190 million tonnes). The amendments also aim at bringing better support to the 17 low income states, special support to farmers who protect the climate, and support to countries that are put at a disadvantage through effort sharing (such as Ireland, Spain and Italy). "This is the guarantee of a balance between the commitments of the EU and the sectors of economic activity", Catherine Bearder MEP (ALDE, UK), who was representing Dutch liberal rapporteur Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (as he was not able to attend due to family reasons) stated.
Everyone congratulated Gerbrandy on the excellent work he had done and considerable effort he had put in.
Taking 2018 as the reference year instead of 2020 does not having the backing of the EPP, but the group is ready for compromise, shadow rapporteur Pilar Ayuso (EPP, Spain) stated, saying that her group "has not touched the national objectives". In Ayuso's view, "90 million tonnes of reserve is a good thing for supporting the efforts of the less developed countries in the effort sharing".
On behalf of the GUE/NGL Group, Kateřina Konečná (Czech Republic) said it was "regrettable, this new reserve encroaches on the market stability reserve". In the view of Jadwiga Wiśniewska (Poland), the ECR Group cannot accept 2018 as the reference year because "it is too early for the less rich countries".
Speaking for the S&D Group, Miriam Dalli (Malta) called on the Parliament to vote for an "ambitious" position, accepting conformity controls every two years instead of every five, because "this is possible, and it's no longer the time to relax the rules".
The Greens/EFA Group noted the difference between the stated and actual ambition, and deplored, as did Bas Eickhout (Netherlands) for example, that the debate planned for Wednesday on the USA's withdrawal from the Paris Agreement did not take place on Tuesday. "The big parties did not want this link. It is comfortable to criticise Trump while not doing enough for the Paris Agreement. The EU's objective of at least a 40% reduction in its emissions by 2030 in relation to 1990 is not enough. The amendments aim to reintroduce loopholes. I hope the EPP will think about this when it criticises Trump!", he said.
Wednesday's vote will focus on a mandate for opening inter-institutional negotiations.
European Commissioner for Climate Action and Energy Miguel Arias Cañete said that the long-term objective introduced by the environment committee (an 80% reduction in emissions by 2050) was not welcome. In his view, "it is too easy to assign a long-term trajectory without assessing the impact and before the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] publishes its special report" in 2018 on what the 1.5 degree objective of the Paris Agreement represents. "Partial objectives must not be set in stone", he said, giving assurances that "the Commission will deal with the long-term objective long before 2020".
Cañete rejected the idea that the EU's objective was not enough. "It's the most ambitious objective in the world", he said. He also said he was encouraged by the G7 Environment results (11-12 June, Bologna, Italy). This conference saw the ministers of six countries (all except the USA) and the EU confirm the irreversible nature of the Paris Agreement in a joint statement. (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)