The ‘European Green Deal’ was at the centre of two debates held on Wednesday 18 December at the plenary session of the European Parliament. One, proposed by Nicola Procaccini (ECR, Italian), for the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR), focused on competitiveness, while the other, initiated by the Greens/EFA, focused on the need to preserve nature and protect biodiversity.
The debate on competitiveness brought together 87 speakers and lasted two hours and thirty minutes. The second debate, with its 16 speakers, was completed in thirty-five minutes, confirming, if proof were needed, that the ‘Green Deal’ is being approached from the point of view of competitiveness in this new European mandate. In submitting the debate on nature conservation, the Greens/EFA wanted to reiterate that the environment must remain a priority in its own right.
The extinction of species is nevertheless “one of the most dramatic crises threatening mankind”, German MEP Jutta Paulus was keen to point out on behalf of the Greens, “in front of what were unfortunately fairly empty rows”.
The ‘Green Deal’ or competitiveness. Earlier in the day, during the debate on the impact of the ‘Green Deal’ on the EU’s competitiveness, Nicola Procaccini said that “environmental protection is a privilege that only economically healthy nations can afford”. The MEP listed the ‘Green Deal’ policies with “catastrophic” consequences, such as, according to him: a ban on internal combustion engines by 2035; an obligation for European aviation to use more expensive sustainable fuels (“while all other world airlines will continue to use conventional fuels”); an obligation to increase energy consumption from renewable sources to 42.5% by 2030; an emissions quota system, etc.
The brainchild of the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, the ‘European Green Deal’ is now being strongly criticised by members of her political family, the European People’s Party (EPP). This “is not yet an opportunity for our companies, but above all a burden”, pointed out Markus Ferber, on behalf of the EPP.
The ‘Green Deal’ and competitiveness. True to the Commission’s roadmap, Teresa Ribera, Executive Vice-President of the European Commission for a Clean, Fair and Competitive Transition, defended the best of all worlds, pointing out that the ‘Green Deal’ remained the “roadmap for sustainability, but also for competitiveness”. So the debate is no longer about whether or not to protect nature, but about implementing the ‘Green Deal’.
Later, during the second debate, her counterpart, European Commissioner for the Environment, Jessika Roswall, declared that “72% of businesses in the euro area are heavily dependent on at least one ecosystem service” and therefore on the good health of nature.
With the ‘Green Deal’, the EU is condemning “our farmers, breeders and fishers to ruin”, according to Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE). Just before her, in the second debate, Elisabetta Gualmini (S&D, Italian) said that farmers were “the first victims of biodiversity loss”. Because of this, farmers need to be helped “economically”, but also “through training and innovative tools such as sustainable biotechnologies”. According to the Italian MEP, “agriculture and biodiversity” must “never” be pitted against each other. (Original version in French by Florent Servia)