Most MEPs called for the EU to act more decisively and quickly to help contain the climate and ecological crisis, during a current affairs debate on Wednesday 23 October, which was included on the agenda of Parliament's plenary session at the request of the S&D group. The latter was disappointed that last week's European Council did not give the impetus they hoped for (see EUROPE 12352/5).
Radical action, ambition and opportunities were the watchwords of this political group to ensure that the EU is listening to young people and world leader in socially just climate neutrality by 2050 and raises its 2030 target to a reduction of at least 55% of its emissions. Many MEPs quoted the IPCC reports on both 1.5 degrees C and the oceans.
The ECR and ID groups were the only ones to vilify an "unrealistic" or "ideological" European discourse.
The climate crisis and the climate emergency are being addressed on the streets and in Parliament. Enough empty rhetoric! We need binding measures that make a difference. We are asking for an ambitious plan, Miriam Dalli (S&D, Malta) said in a sparse Chamber.
The transition from fossil fuels to clean energy, sustainable agricultural models, a plan to combat deforestation and reforestation, investments in new technologies to tackle the water problem, a just transition fund sufficiently resourced, the choice of new food sources, accelerated emission reductions were the measures often mentioned.
Between climate sceptics and those who recommend that modest citizens buy a Tesla, Esther de Lange (EPP, Denmark) called for "not only greening Europe, but giving it a strong industrial strategy for a more efficient industry that preserves jobs".
For Soraya Rodriguez Ramos (Renew Europe, Spain), "all governments must act very quickly".
On behalf of the EU Council, Finnish Minister Tytti Tuppurainen stressed that the scale of societal and economic change will require the involvement of all sectors - a subject discussed at the EU Council since November and which could lead to a "very important European Council" at the end of the year.
Norbert Lins (EPP, Germany) called for a "stop in demonization of certain actors or sectors", citing in particular frustrated farmers who are being singled out "when agriculture and forestry contribute 10% of EU emissions" and that, in his opinion, a European incentive mechanism could be envisaged.
Referring to the future European Green Deal promised by the President-elect of the Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, Commissioner Günther Oettinger (replacing his colleague Miguel Arias Cañete) stressed the need for impact assessments and suggested, among the possible measures, to focus on modern technologies through Horizon Europe, the withdrawal of allowances from the carbon market to increase the price per tonne of CO2, trade agreements with non-Member States to be used as leverage, the extension of the ETS to transport and buildings.
"When I hear you, I don't see the urgency. You're talking about objectives set 5 years ago. The urgency must be visible in the action of the Commission and the EU Council", replied Bas Eickhout (Greens/EFA, the Netherlands), criticising "the pious wishes for CAP reform and the voluntary chapters of trade agreements". The same frustration was expressed by Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL, Portugal), who described the ETS and trade agreements as "old solutions that led to the disaster". Anja Hazekamp (GUE/NGL, the Netherlands) said that a "state of emergency for climate and biodiversity" should be declared.
"How can we mobilize 1,000 billion euros of climate investments when we are unable to finance the Green Fund?", asked Catherine Griset (ID, France). (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)