In the wake of the announcement by the Trump administration of its withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, it is more necessary than ever that the EU makes progress towards adopting legislation on reducing emissions from key sectors not covered by the emissions trading system (ETS): that would be the best response the EU could give to the US defection, said European environment and climate ministers in Luxembourg on Monday 19 June (see other article)
It was in this spirit that they demonstrated their desire to reach political agreement by October, before COP 23, on the draft regulation on the sharing of effort among member states on reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the transport, agriculture, buildings and waste sectors (-30% for the 2021-2030 period by comparison with 2005) – a proposal on which the European Parliament has just voted (see EUROPE 11808).
Denmark, Germany, Italy and Luxembourg expressed their disappointment that the political agreement could not be reached in this session. They all acknowledged, however, that, despite the significant efforts of the Maltese Presidency, further discussions would be needed in the Council working group in order to make progress on the basis of the compromise proposals on the table (see EUROPE 11809). Estonian minister Siim Kiisler, speaking for the incoming Estonian Presidency of the Council, gave assurances that he, too, would do his utmost.
Summarising the debate, José Herrera, chairing this last Environment Council under the Maltese Presidency, noted “the desire to maintain the momentum, both domestically and internationally, and to remain united in order to reach an agreement before COP 23”. With regard to effort-sharing, he welcomed the agreement in principle to his compromise proposal that the emphasis be put on the final areas of disagreement. He indicated that there were differing views on the Lulucf regulation between countries where forestry is important and those where it is not. If a degree of flexibility is to be included while maintaining environmental integrity, differences will have to be overcome on the arrangements on the room for manoeuvre offered.
Luxembourg’s Green environment minister Carole Dieschbourg was the most outspoken, warning her counterparts against any attempt to water down efforts that could damage implementation of the Paris Agreement. “Implementation must be faultless. The credibility of the EU is at stake”, she warned, arguing for a review clause for the two pieces of legislation that is in line with the five-yearly objectives review cycle of the Paris Agreement.
French minister Nicolas Hulot was detained in Paris following the result of the country’s second round of voting in its general election and was unable to attend the meeting. The French ambassador to the EU, Fabrice Dubreuil, made clear “France’s determination to reach agreement by October”.
Effort-sharing. With regard to the safety reserve, the additional flexibility proposed by the Presidency to help those countries, such as Italy and Spain, which have already made significant efforts to reach their 2020 target was relatively well received. But while a number of countries (Spain, Sweden, Belgium and Denmark) emphasised that it can only be acceptable so long as other elements of the package are not touched, others, particularly among the low-income countries, felt that their allocation was too low. Polish minister Jan Szyszko suggested that a reserve of 230 million tonnes of CO² equivalent.
Lulucf. On including emissions/absorption by forests, the countries where forestry is significant, determined that account be taken of the sustainable management of forests and harvested products, are still not satisfied. Differences remain between the countries which want the forest reference level to be based on historic data and the forest countries which are keen to have a reference that takes projections into account. These latter countries would also like member states to be responsible for reviewing reference levels. Denmark, Italy, Spain and the Netherlands called for robust, credible accounting rules. (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)