Summary of the hearing of Connie Hedegaard - climate change

Ms Hedegaard was disappointed that the Copenhagen conference had not delivered binding targets, but stressed that "a lot has changed in the last few years" and that the EU "had played a tremendously important role in paving the way for change".

Much of the climate legislation needed in the EU, e.g. on energy efficiency and CO2 emission reductions, is already in place and "must now be implemented properly", she said, adding that transport and agricultural policies also need to be made more climate-friendly: "We must mainstream climate into all relevant policy areas".

 

 

In her capacity as former Danish minister for climate change and for the Copenhagen climate change summit (COP15), Ms Hedegaard also replied to a range of questions on the outcome. She underlined that despite the lack of a binding agreement, COP 15 had delivered commitments on funding and an agreement to keep temperature rises below 2° C, to which both developed countries and emerging economies subscribed.

 

"It is a bit tough to blame those who worked most to achieve a turnaround for the global climate, for those who in the end chose not to deliver," she said in reply to critical questions from Chris Davies (ALDE, UK). She also stressed that the EU should continue to push other countries to set more ambitious targets. Asked by Bas Eickhout (Greens/EFA, NL) about plans to step up the EU emission reduction target from 20% to 30% (by 2020, from 1990 levels), she said that this should be done as soon as possible, but in a way that would encourage other countries to go further, too.

 

 

Richard Seeber (EPP, DE) asked how progress could be made on the climate change agenda. Ms Hedegaard noted that the EU already had energy efficiency and emission reduction targets and said "the challenge for the next five years is to implement them". The EU could nonetheless do more to reduce emissions from road transport, e.g. through rules for lorries, and from shipping, she continued, adding that modernising and "greening" agricultural policies could turn agriculture into "an export asset" for the EU.

 

Replying to an observation by Marita Ulvskog (S&D, SE), that there is never enough money, Ms Hedegaard said "it is absolutely crucial that there is a better co-ordination between what we say will be our political priorities and targets for the next period and what we actually prioritise in our budget".

 

She also argued that "the successor to the Lisbon Strategy must have incentives that promote low-carbon and green technologies" and called for a "systematic 'climate proofing' of all new infrastructure projects that are financed by the European Union".

 

Ms Hedegaard stressed the need for the European emission trading system (ETS) to fit well with a coming American system.   Answering to Eija-Riitta Korhola's (EPP, FI) question on whether the linking requires identical targets as well as allocation of allowances, Hedegaard said she though that "you do not have to have exactly the same allowances" and that "if we could set the standard, that would be in the end, I hope, the global norm." Hedegaard added that "vision must be that we have a global system with a global price for carbon".

 

On shipping emissions, Ms Hedegaard said, in a reply to Linda McAvan (S&D, UK), that the EU should stick to the 2011 deadline for including shipping in the ETS scheme and that she had already put pressure on the international maritime organisation (IMO) to speed up the process in order to find a global solution for the maritime sector. 

 

 

Kartika Liotard (GUE/NGL) asked Ms Hedegaard's views on nuclear energy. "In my universe, nuclear (energy) is not a renewable resource", she replied, but acknowledged that "the policy for a long time in the EU has been that the energy mix will be up to the countries themselves". She had "no doubt" that nuclear energy "will also be in the world for many years", and said that the highest priority must therefore be given to safety.

 

Asked by Satu Hassi (Greens/EFA), whether she would be tough "towards the most polluting form of power production - coal power", Ms Hedegaard pointed out that coal power plants are already part of the ETS. As regards setting CO2 emission performance standards for power stations, "we should wait and see whether the CCS technology actually works", she said.

 

 

Martin Callanan (ECR, UK), asked what measures Ms Hedegaard proposed to mitigate the disadvantage to EU heavy industry and to prevent the transfer of emissions to third countries should no binding global agreement be reached. She conceded that the "threat of carbon leakage is real", but observed that "we should take care that we are not so cautious, so balanced, that in the end it will not benefit our companies", adding that "European industry has to be pushed gently but decisively in the right direction".

 

 

Anna Rosbach (EFD, DK), asked about the environmental impact of the Nord Stream pipeline in the Baltic sea and EU dependence on gas from Russia. Ms Hedegaard replied that the EU would approve the project only if environmental protection measures are respected, and added that the EU would be less vulnerable with several pipelines than with just one.