MEPs from the Environment and Public Health (ENVI) and Employment and Social Affairs (EMPL) committees were divided on the link between the Social Climate Fund (SCF) and the future ETS2 emissions trading scheme extended to buildings and transport, at a joint meeting on the Social Climate Fund on Thursday 10 February.
The co-rapporteur for the ENVI committee, Esther de Lange (EPP, Netherlands), acknowledged at the outset of the presentation of the report she is negotiating with David Casa (EPP, Malta) for the EMPL committee that the question of the link between the SCF and the ETS2 regime will be a source of tension in the negotiations between MEPs.
The two MEPs are maintaining the link between the Fund and ETS2, but changing the modalities (see EUROPE 12871/12): the ETS2 revenues will fully finance the Fund. They are therefore requesting that “at least” €72.2 billion should be allocated to it. The Fund should follow the revenue in this way, without a ceiling, contrary to the original proposal of the European Commission (see EUROPE 12762/6). If ETS2 does not generate enough revenue, it should be up to the Multiannual Financial Framework to fill the budgetary gap, they propose.
However, despite these adjustments, this link displeases a number of MEPs who believe it would be preferable to disconnect the Fund from the ETS2, such as Klára Dobrev (S&D, Hungary), Marie-Pierre Vedrenne (Renew Europe, France), Michael Bloss (Greens/EFA, Germany) or Beata Szydło (ECR, Poland).
All denounce the risks that the extension of this system poses for the most vulnerable households, some speaking of a “social and political bomb”. Some mentioned the possibility of fully connecting the Fund to the existing ETS1 regime. Only Ondřej Knotek (Renew Europe, Czech Republic) clearly emphasised the link between the ETS2 regime and the Fund.
The European Commission, following the discussions, adopted a very clear position: “any change to the Multiannual Financial Framework will require unanimity in the EU Council”. The senior Commission official added that without an extension of the ETS, there will be no new resources and, without this, it will not be possible to reach an agreement on the financing of the Fund in the EU Council. He also warned against a solution outside the EU budget, which he said would not allow for the development of national plans over several years.
Margarida Marques (S&D, Portugal), who is rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Budgets, agreed. Opting for an intergovernmental solution, disconnected from the Multiannual Financial Framework, would remove any control power from the European Parliament and also any predictability from the Fund. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)