The European Commission tried to reassure the members of the European Parliament’s Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI) on Tuesday 16 June about the ‘green conditionality’ of its recovery plan, Next Generation EU, without much success.
Several MEPs, such as Peter Liese (EPP, Germany), Jytte Guteland (S&D, Sweden), Bas Eickhout (Greens/EFA, the Netherlands) and Eleonora Evi (Non-attached, Italy), expressed concern that under the current version of the recovery plan, the Commission will not be able to enforce the ‘do no harm principle’, i.e., to ensure that EU aid granted to Member States under the plan will not support projects that are harmful to the environment.
In an attempt to address these concerns, the Director General of the Commission’s Directorate General for Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), Maarten Verwey, first reaffirmed the institution’s commitment to placing the green and digital transition at the heart of the EU’s recovery (see EUROPE 12494/2).
He then recalled the procedures laid down for this purpose (see EUROPE 12496/12), in particular the fact that the national recovery plans of Member States wishing to benefit from European funds under the ‘Recovery and Resilience Facility’ (the first pillar of Next Generation EU) would be assessed in particular with regard to their consistency with the national energy and climate plans (NECP).
He added, however, that the consistency of these plans with the achievement of the NECPs would not necessarily have to be 100%.
Biodiversity, the main weakness of the NECPs. The ENVI Committee meeting was also an opportunity for Paula Pinho, Head of Unit in the Commission’s Directorate General for Energy (DG ENER), and Artur Runge-Metzger, Director in the Commission’s Directorate General for Climate (DG CLIMA), to provide some additional details from the preliminary analysis of the NECPs compared to the elements mentioned yesterday (Monday) by Energy Commissioner Kadri Simson (see EUROPE 12506/1).
With regard to total greenhouse gas emissions, the level of ambition has increased in relation to the NECP projects, particularly in the fields of renovation, renewable energies and mobility, Mr Runge-Metzger said.
According to the preliminary analysis, the plans of the 27 Member States should be sufficient in their current form to meet the EU’s target of reducing emissions by 40% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels, provided they are properly implemented.
The analysis has additionally shown that there is scope to further increase the ambition of the plans, in order to meet a more ambitious European target for 2030, as the Commission plans to propose in September, Mr Runge-Metzger said.
Questioned by César Luena (S&D, Spain) on whether or not there were references to biodiversity restoration targets in the different plans, the Director acknowledged that the biggest gaps in the plans generally concerned the issue of biodiversity and ecosystems.
On energy, the analysis showed that the plans remain insufficient to hope to improve energy efficiency by at least 32.5% at EU level by 2030, despite a clear improvement compared to the NECP projects, in particular as regards renewable energy, but also in terms of security of supply, Ms Pinho stressed.
She also recalled that the Commission was still awaiting the long-term national renovation strategies of most Member States (19 according to the Commission’s website), which were due in March this year.
While Ireland’s NECP is still missing, the Commission intends to present an assessment of the NECPs at EU level in September, followed by detailed national analyses in October. (Original version in French by Damien Genicot)