Relato integral dos debates

Terça-feira, 17 de Dezembro de 2019 - Estrasburgo

14. Resultados da COP25 (debate)

  Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärungen des Rates und der Kommission zu den Ergebnissen der COP 25 (2019/2998(RSP)).

Ich möchte Sie auch bei dieser Aussprache daran erinnern, dass Sie sowohl in üblicher Weise wie auch mithilfe des elektronischen Systems um die Möglichkeit zu spontanen Wortmeldungen sowie zur Verwendung der blauen Karte ersuchen können. Gebrauchsanleitungen liegen immer noch am Eingang zum Plenarsaal aus.

  Tytti Tuppurainen, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, thank you for this opportunity to discuss the outcome of the COP25, which has just finished in Madrid.

You are certainly aware that the conference ended 42 hours after schedule – a delay which is testimony to the difficulties encountered during the negotiations.

With your permission, I will come back to these difficulties in a moment. I would like to point out some important progress that was made in the EU’s climate policy last week.

Firstly, last Wednesday the Commission presented the European Green Deal, which is a road map to embed climate action into all policies.

Secondly, one of the main priorities of the Finnish Presidency was reached in the European Council which, after a long debate, endorsed the objective of achieving a climate neutral EU by 2050, in line with the objectives of the Paris Agreement.

However, one Member State at this stage was not able to commit to implementing this objective as far as it was concerned, and the European Council will come back to this Member State’s position in June 2020.

The decision by the European Council is a step forward. The EU has now agreed on the common objective of climate neutrality and all the Member States but one have committed to implementing it. It is important that the work continues and that next year all Member States will commit to its implementation.

Now, honourable Members, coming back to the Madrid Conference. I would like to recall what was at stake at the conference, both for the planet and for the EU.

COP25 had three major objectives.

First and foremost, to finalise the rule book on the issue of the carbon market, as laid down in Article 6 of the Paris Agreement.

Second, to complete the review of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage, and finally to agree on the extension and revision of the Gender Action Plan.

On these objectives the EU negotiation position was clear. The rules on Article 6 should ensure robust accounting for the use of international carbon markets, should avoid double counting and should also guarantee environmental integrity.

Concerning the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage, the EU should resist calls to create additional institutional mechanisms, but should support instead solutions that would provide for countries to effectively address loss and damage associated with climate change.

As to the gender action plan, the EU was supportive of an extension and revision which strengthens gender considerations and women’s participation in climate action.

On 2 December, addressing the conference on behalf of the EU, the Presidency made it clear that, in front of this climate emergency – the one this Parliament declared last month – we had to change our approach dramatically and embrace the green revolution. Our objective being to make Europe the first climate—neutral continent on the planet by 2050.

Indeed, during these two weeks of negotiations, it became increasingly clear that there was an elephant in the room – ambition, which was not on the agenda of this COP – turned out to be a major issue.

A number of parties, together with NGOs, the youth with Greta Thunberg, and the public at large, in their thousands in the streets of Madrid, called on the COP to do more to address the climate emergency.

Here I salute our team of negotiators who spared no effort and worked literally 24/7 to achieve the best possible results. Their task was made extremely difficult because a small number of parties either refused to engage or insisted on mechanisms under Article 6 that could potentially be the death knell of the Paris Agreement.

Until the very last hours of the COP, the EU showed the maximum possible flexibility in view of striking a deal which would preserve environmental integrity. Unfortunately it proved impossible.

Ladies and gentlemen, there are several lessons to be drawn from this experience.

First, standing by its principles for the common good, the EU is increasingly recognised as the champion and the main actor of the Paris Agreement. By launching the EU Green Deal we translate our words into action.

Second, great progress has been made. Although no agreement was reached on Article 6, the quality of the texts on the table has significantly improved. An agreement on these texts at the COP26 in Glasgow next year seems within reach.

Third, we read in the news that the results of the COP are disappointing, but we should look at what has been achieved. The review of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage and of the framework for capacity building have been successfully completed, and the Gender Action Plan has been extended. And it was agreed that the work on the global climate action agenda would continue beyond 2020.

So, ladies and gentlemen, to conclude, the EU will continue to negotiate the implementation of the Paris Agreement in the same spirit. In 2020 the parties will have to update their nationally—determined contributions and submit their long—term strategy.

I would take this opportunity to call on all parties to update their nationally—determined contributions in a manner that reflects their highest possible ambition.

I look forward to this debate and I thank you very much for your attention.

  Frans Timmermans, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, the European Union and its Member States, as was shown by the Member States present, the delegation of the European Parliament and the Commission, stand firm behind the Paris Agreement. We stand firm behind the global transition to a climate-neutral future and the Commission believes in a Green Deal for Europe to lead the way.

The COP in Madrid is now behind us. It did not deliver what we had travelled there for on international carbon markets and on other issues. For Europe, there were some bridges that we just could not cross if we want to lead on climate; if we wanted to stay credible towards our international partners; if we wanted to respond to the young people in the streets and to citizens here at home in Europe who are asking for action and a plan for the climate.

To put it plainly, we could not support global rules that would undermine the very integrity of global climate action. We could not endorse an outcome that would take us back on climate instead of taking us, and the rest of the world, forward. But now, we, in Europe, will be looking forward. We will build on the global consensus to work next year to increase climate ambitions worldwide.

I noticed, and I think many of us who were there noticed, that the world is watching us, and they know that our task is more urgent than ever. Last week we presented in your Parliament the European Green Deal, which is our proposed roadmap to take climate action across all our policies. We have committed to climate neutrality by 2050, and we set out a timeline to increase our ambition for our emissions reductions in 2030. That’s Europe’s momentum to increase ambitions worldwide and we will work relentlessly next year to do this.

And I have to say that there were quite a number of countries in Madrid who were interested by this and who want to talk to us to see whether we can create alliances and help them do the same.

By COP26 in Glasgow, we intend to propose to update our nationally determined contributions to tackle climate change. We also need to submit our long-term strategies in line with the Paris objectives and in the European Union we are ready for this. We cannot afford to leave anyone behind.

At the COP in Madrid, Europe showed solidarity with the countries that are most vulnerable to climate change. We must make sure that we help the most vulnerable in their climate efforts so that they are taken along in this effort, that they have the capacity to deal with the changes so that they find courage and hope in a better, sustainable future. You know, nothing makes such an impression as talking to representatives from countries that can quite literally disappear if we don’t do anything about climate change.

So I think that we can build the capacity to deal with the changes so that we, together with them, can find the solutions. This is what our citizens want, in Europe. They want it also for people outside of Europe. The EU and its Member States already provide more than 40% of the global climate finance. Europe will continue to scale it up in line with the Paris Agreement, so we remain firmly committed to boosting global climate finance and to supporting developing countries.

We remain committed to achieving the USD 100 billion financial goal and financing the key funds under the Convention and Paris Agreement. We look forward to the commencement of deliberations on the post-2025 goal at COP26, to submitting information on our finance beyond 2020 next year, and to taking further action to align global finance with the Paris goals.

This Commission and this Parliament know that people are calling for action, and that in fact they are taking action on the streets themselves to push us for more ambition and a concrete climate plan. Most of us who have children know they talk to us at home – what are you doing? Are you doing enough? You should be doing more! It’s a good thing. It’s a good thing to see this young generation lead us. It’s a good thing to see that the 16-year-old climate activist was named Person of the Year by Time magazine. It’s good that this generation is taking this huge responsibility.

I think our Green Deal responds to the calls. The Green Deal is a start for Europe to reinvent itself, to base our wealth and our well—being not just on carbon, to get rid of that as an essential element. I believe it’s a once in a lifetime opportunity to deliver a greener and cleaner future for our citizens, without leaving anyone behind.

Next year, on the global stage, we will work with our partners to raise global ambitions. We will fight to make sure that we all face head-on the urgent challenges of climate change. I know we can count on this Parliament to do that, and I know that this Parliament understands that the fact that Europe has only 9% of emissions does not give us an excuse to not do anything, because I’ve also seen in Madrid that if we lead, others will follow. If we lead, others will be convinced to go the same way. If we lead, those who are hesitating today will no longer be hesitating tomorrow.

  Peter Liese, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Herr Vizepräsident Timmermans, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Angesichts der Dringlichkeit des Handelns und der berechtigten Erwartungen der Menschen, insbesondere der jungen Menschen, war das natürlich eine Enttäuschung, was in Madrid passiert ist. Insbesondere bei Artikel 6 wäre es gut gewesen, wir hätten ein gutes Ergebnis erzielt. Aber wir auch als Delegation des Europäischen Parlaments haben der Kommission und dem Rat immer gesagt: lieber gar kein Deal zu Artikel 6 als ein schlechter Deal. Denn es bestand die Gefahr, dass man hinter das Pariser Abkommen zurückfällt, dass die alte Welt, wo nicht alle Staaten Verpflichtungen haben, rübergerettet werden sollte in die neue Periode, wo eben auch Staaten wie Brasilien Verpflichtungen haben, selber etwas zu tun und nicht nur Handel mit fragwürdigen Zertifikaten in ihrem Land stattfinden lassen sollen. Deswegen war es richtig, dass die Kommission und der Rat hier streng geblieben sind.

Außerhalb der offiziellen Verhandlungsräume gab es durchaus eine positive Entwicklung: Seit einigen Jahren habe ich immer systematisch unsere Partner aus Japan, Südafrika, Mexiko und vielen anderen großen Ländern gefragt: Was macht ihr, um euer Klimaziel zu erhöhen? Und bis vor ein paar Monaten war dann immer großes Schweigen. Teilweise wussten die überhaupt nicht, worüber wir reden, wenn wir in Europa über höhere Ambitionen reden und teilweise Gesetze beschlossen haben, die über Paris hinausgehen, dann wussten die nicht, wovon wir reden. Das hat sich geändert. Wir werden Partner finden, zum Beispiel auch mit Kanada, aber auch den aufgezählten Ländern. Und wir müssen weiter Druck ausüben. Deswegen ist die internationale Dimension der Klimapolitik jetzt wichtiger als jemals zuvor. Deswegen will die EVP auch einen hochrangigen Klimabotschafter.

Herr Vizepräsident, der Tag hat nur 24 Stunden, Sie können nicht alles alleine machen. Aber ich weiß, dass das auch für Sie eine Priorität ist. Und wir müssen gemeinsam handeln. Denn nur, wenn die Europäische Union führt, aber andere mitnimmt, dann können wir einen gefährlichen Klimawandel wirklich vermeiden.

  Jytte Guteland, för S&D-gruppen. – Herr talman! Vice president och herr kommissionär! Jag vill börja med det tydliga budskapet till medborgarna i Europa om att vi som tillhörde denna delegation absolut åkte till Madrid med de högsta förväntningarna och med ett starkt politiskt budskap från Europaparlamentet. Men så här i efterhand så måste jag precis som alla tidigare talare konstatera att Madrid, trots det goda värdskapet från Spanien och Madrid, inte levererade politiskt det vi har rätt att förvänta oss som medborgare.

Den regelbok som skulle bli ett starkt kvitto på att man lever upp till Parisavtalet blev inte alls lyckad. Trots långa förhandlingar och väldigt goda intentioner, inte minst ifrån EU:s sida, så lyckades man inte få en överenskommelse om regelboken. Det här är mycket negativt och jag skulle säga direkt oansvarigt av de länder som borde ställas till svars för detta, exempelvis Brasilien, USA och Ryssland, som höll en mycket destruktiv linje. Det enda som tröstar är att en dålig deal hade varit sämre än ingen deal. Faktum är att ett svagt regelverk hade kunnat underminera vår möjlighet att göra ett starkare klimatår 2020.

Jag vill också ge en eloge till kommissionen för dess arbete och Frans Timmermans för hans hårda arbete i Madrid, också för Green Deal som verkligen kommer att bli en ”game changer” för Europa, men därmed också ge ett tydligt budskap från EU till resten av världen att vi ännu tydligare är redo att ta ett ledarskap tillsammans med de konstruktiva krafter som lyssnar på vetenskapen och ungdomarna.

Det här är ju den enda vägen framåt. Det måste vara tydligt. Vi ska göra mer för att minska våra utsläpp i Europa och i EU, men vi måste också fortsätta att behålla trycket på det internationella samfundet inför Glasgow, och det är skönt att vi är enade i det budskapet. Det är också viktigt att alla tar ansvar, alla branscher, alla länder, alla politiska nivåer. Och vi socialdemokrater från den socialdemokratiska gruppen kommer vara en väldigt viktig del i det arbetet och trycka på för högre ambition.

VORSITZ: NICOLA BEER
Vizepräsidentin

  Nils Torvalds, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, I would actually like to start by thanking the Commissioner, with the too long title, for the way in which he kept us informed during the days in Madrid. We had a strong feeling that we were in the loop. The same gratefulness goes also to the Finnish Presidency, especially one old policy advisor from the Parliament who was a very eager person, who informed us at almost every step. So we knew what was going on, and what was going on was really disturbing.

After coming back from Madrid, I tried to quantify what was actually at stake. A report from the US Department of Energy says that the amount of Russian allowances is about 884 million tonnes, probably the same amount as in China. So had we given in during the negotiations, there wouldn’t have been any policy left. So we did the thing we had to do.

For my part, the most touching discussion we had was actually with the delegation from the United States. There’s an old saying in American politics: the shining city on the hill. That was used in 1630 when the first pilgrims left for the eastern coast. That was a mark of being a leading state in the world. Today, the US is not the shining city on the hill anymore. So congratulations, Commissioner, I think we are the shining example when we speak about environmental policy in the world in the future.

  Bas Eickhout, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, first of all I would like to thank the Finnish Presidency and the Commissioner for their contributions in Madrid in trying to make something out of this.

But let’s be honest: Madrid was a disappointment. It was clearly a disappointment. It has been stated before. We came to Madrid with little on the agenda, and even that we didn’t manage to conclude. And that does not bode well for next year in Glasgow, because then it needs to happen. In Glasgow, that’s the moment where we can really raise our ambition. And it’s needed. We are still on a track of warming more than three degrees, with all the devastating consequences, and the world is bickering about details, about allowances, taking them from old to new periods, or here in the Parliament, the EPP is saying that we need a climate envoy. This kind of institutional battling doesn’t help the climate. What helps is really more ambition from Europe, and what is important there is that we need it on time.

This is really a question to the Commissioner: how do you see 2020 evolving? Because this is going to be a crucial year. How are we going to make it happen that Europe is on time with increasing its ambition so that in September, when there is the EU-China summit in Leipzig, we can really try to get China on board with more ambition? Because that is absolutely needed in order to create dynamics when we go to Glasgow and also to get other partners in the world at a higher ambition level. This kind of choreography is a bit unclear so far, and I would like to hear from the Commissioner what his view is on how he sees 2020.

A final comment: the role of some of the countries was clearly just blocking, and one of them was Brazil. And I would also like to hear, both from the Council and the Commission: will this have repercussions for the trade deal that is on the table – Mercosur? We all know it will not pass anyhow; there are already countries saying that they will vote against. So this is also the moment to really become serious about sustainability demands within our trade deals, and Mercosur should be the first.

  Silvia Sardone, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la conferenza ONU sui cambiamenti climatici è stata un totale fallimento. Lo slogan era “Il tempo di agire” – che tra l'altro è lo slogan che utilizza anche la nota Greta – il risultato un totale flop.

Ci ricorderemo però di questa importante riunione internazionale solamente per i soldi sprecati. Circa 200 i delegati, stati lì per due settimane, prima per altre settimane sono andati i funzionari, quelli dello staff, tutti ovviamente con voli verso Madrid, con buona pace dell'inquinamento di cui tanto voi vi riempite la bocca, probabilmente lì non era importante, gli ecologisti lì non se ne interessavano. Ma una bella videoconferenza, no? Perché tanto per finire con un nulla di fatto non è che c'era bisogno di movimentare tutta questa gente.

L'Unione europea ha fatto una figura misera, e comunque lasciatemi dire che dovrebbe anche smettere di caricarsi di responsabilità non proprie perché accollarsi l'intero onere dei cambiamenti climatici mi sembra un po' una follia.

Gli accordi di Parigi del 2015 hanno stabilito obiettivi climatici per i paesi sviluppati dicendo che devono muoversi loro per primi. Ma io mi domando, Cina e India, che sono i giganti economici mondiali, che sono in testa alle classifiche per le emissioni CO2 ed inquinamento però nell'Unione europea continuano ad essere considerati paesi in via di sviluppo, con la conseguenza che sono liberi di inquinare fino al 2030 e addirittura sono liberi di spartirsi cento miliardi di dollari da Europa, America e anche gli altri paesi sviluppati per le nuove politiche climatiche.

A me piacerebbe un approccio un po' più realistico da parte dell'Unione europea e anche avere politiche per il clima non così tanto invasive. In generale, anche che voi pensaste un po' più ai problemi dei cittadini europei.

  Jadwiga Wiśniewska, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Porozumienie paryskie z 2015 roku potwierdziło determinację stron, by radykalnie ograniczyć emisję gazów cieplarnianych. Niektórzy twierdzili nawet, że po jego przyjęciu nie będzie już potrzeby ochrony unijnego przemysłu przed konkurencją globalną. Czym innym jest jednak ogólny traktat spisane na papierze, a czym innym konkretne zapisy mające wprowadzić go w życie. To drugie okazało się zbyt trudne. W Katowicach poczyniono ogromny postęp w tej dziedzinie, opracowując Katowicką Księgę Reguł, zabrakło jednak reguł dotyczących mechanizmów rynkowych przewidzianych w art. 6. COP 25 był poświęcony właśnie temu jednemu zagadnieniu i właśnie tego zagadnienia nie udało się opracować.

Powód jest oczywisty – właśnie te mechanizmy rynkowe stanowią źródło dochodu dla wielu stron porozumienia paryskiego, z którego nie chcą one zrezygnować. Do tego mamy wciąż problemy z przejrzystością. Chiny wciąż udowadniają, że nie chcą zbyt dużej przejrzystości w sprawozdawczości, co podaje w wątpliwość szczerość ich intencji. Dlatego dziś wcale nie możemy mówić o tym, że zasady ochrony naszego przemysłu przed konkurencją globalną ze strony państw o słabszych rozwiązaniach klimatycznych są już przeżytkiem. Wciąż tej ochrony potrzebujemy, być może bardziej niż kiedykolwiek wcześniej, szczególnie w obliczu Zielonego Ładu, który mamy wprowadzić w życie. Co z europejską gospodarką?

  Mick Wallace, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. – Madam President, COP25 was a let- down and a lack of international leadership and a global swing to the right hasn’t helped. The recent right-wing coups in Venezuela and Bolivia have undermined the positive role of the Latin American ALBA group in these international climate talks. These countries were once prominent advisors on indigenous rights, climate justice, and non-market approaches. Instead, we are making very little progress, thanks to right-wing and liberal major economies. Canada, USA, Australia, Brazil, Saudi Arabia have left a lot to be desired. They are preventing us from even reiterating the requirements of the Paris Agreement in the COP conclusions: that we need to boost our efforts before next year.

It’s a sad affair.

In the run-up to COP25 we were negotiating and celebrating the idea of a trade deal with the Mercosur countries, which is toxic, and the idea that climate diplomacy is going to be an effective tool is a myth, from what we are seeing.

I would like to say to Mr Timmermans that he has a big job at hand and, Mr Timmermans, you will need to get your pal, Phil Hogan, on board as well. Good luck with that one!

  President. – I will keep strictly to the time limit because we have so many catch-the-eyes that, if you overrun the time, I cannot take other colleagues, so please, stick to your time limit.

  Piernicola Pedicini (NI). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, purtroppo sono anni che stiamo assistendo a quello che ormai si può definire un teatrino: la grande conferenza internazionale sul clima. Sono 25 anni e alla 25a edizione il risultato è sempre lo stesso: un niente di fatto, un nulla di fatto.

Venticinque anni che politici, che capi di Stato, capi di governo, scienziati, professori si incontrano e il risultato è ancora una volta lo stesso: niente di fatto. La Cina è il primo paese che inquina al mondo, seguita dagli Stati Uniti, poi l'India, poi c'è la Russia, poi c'è il Giappone e poi c'è la Germania. Voi davvero credete che queste grandi potenze industriali bloccheranno la loro produzione industriale perché si deve salvare il pianeta?

Non lo faranno mai, soltanto 60-70 anni fa, facevano la guerra tra di loro. Facevamo la guerra fra di noi ed eravamo pronti a distruggerci tutti. Milioni di persone sono morte e adesso dovrebbero invece cambiare la loro indole distruttiva perché bisogna salvare il pianeta e perché lo dicono soltanto quattro poveri scienziati. Non lo faranno mai.

Allora bisogna intervenire con l'Unione europea. Sì, questo è vero, ma non basta il Green New Deal. Bisogna impedire che vi siano delle estrazioni di petrolio, ancora una volta, adesso. Bisogna bloccare le importazioni dalla Cina, se la Cina non si adegua. Bisogna bloccare le importazioni dagli Stati Uniti, se gli Stati Uniti non si adeguano. Se non facciamo queste cose coraggiose non cambierà mai nulla e arrostiremo tutti quanti, compresi i nostri figli.

  Pernille Weiss (PPE). – Fru formand! Jeg deltog i COP25 i Madrid i sidste uge, og jeg tror, at mine kollegaer fra alle politiske grupper her i Parlamentet, der også deltog, er enige med mig i, at beskeden fra langt, langt de fleste lande og delegationer, vi talte med, var, at EU skal træde endnu tydeligere ind på den globale scene som den rollemodel, vi er de eneste, der kan udfylde.

Som borgerlig liberal, som kristendemokrat og som konservativ på den danske måde mener jeg, at vi gør det allerbedst i måden, vi samarbejder med vores industrier og virksomheder på, så de kan omstille produktionsmetoder og energiforbrug i en CO2-neutral retning.

Det kan vi kun i Europa Parlamentet, hvis vi samarbejder konstruktivt, teknologineutralt og ikke mindst evidensbaseret, og det kan vi kun, hvis vi laver en grøn industripolitik, der forbedrer Europas konkurrencedygtighed endnu mere, skaber flere jobs og styrker os, så vi er evigt omstillingsparate, således at næste generation ikke skal imødegå den store krise og nødsituation, som vi står og kæmper med lige nu.

  Nicolás González Casares (S&D). – Señora presidenta, antes de nada, me gustaría destacar el éxito organizativo. La cancelación de la COP habría sido un mazazo. Es un orgullo que el Gobierno socialista haya atraído la mirada hacia la solvencia de España. Un éxito que queremos compartir con toda la Unión Europea.

Con todo —como ha dicho la ministra española, Teresa Ribera— la COP de Madrid nos deja un sabor agridulce. En un contexto marcado por la reivindicación social ciudadana, de más ambición contra el cambio climático y, al mismo tiempo, con un conjunto de países con posiciones negacionistas, la Unión Europea ha demostrado liderazgo y firmeza. El acuerdo del Consejo para comprometerse con la neutralidad climática en 2050, la declaración de emergencia climática aprobada en este Parlamento, la presentación simultánea del Pacto Verde Europeo con la COP, con un destacado trabajo del comisario Timmermans, lograron enganchar a otros Gobiernos y conseguir que no descarrilara el Acuerdo de París. Esto nos muestra el poder de la UE cuando trabajamos unidos.

No obstante, es cierto que no se han conseguido avances significativos en los mercados de carbono globales. Algunos pretendían socavar el Acuerdo de París y la posición europea no lo ha permitido. Como se ha dicho, mejor un no acuerdo que un acuerdo malo. No todo son malas noticias. Se ha avanzado en la necesidad de atajar la brecha entre los esfuerzos actuales y los objetivos de París, se ha avanzado en perspectiva de género, en hacer una transición justa.

Nos queda una agenda apretada de cara a Glasgow. Tenemos que alcanzar el 55 % de reducción de emisiones. La generación que nos exige estar a la altura es la que tendrá que rematar esta transición. Pongámoselo fácil. Hagamos más y más deprisa.

  Catherine Chabaud (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Vice-président de la Commission, chers collègues, je rentre aussi de Madrid et je voudrais vous faire part de mon sentiment mitigé parce que nous aurions, effectivement, pu nous attendre à plus d’ambition.

Mais quand même une bonne nouvelle: même si, jusqu’à la fin, nous avons craint que l’océan soit complètement exclu de la déclaration finale, la présidence chilienne a réussi à maintenir son objectif de faire de cette COP une COP bleue. Elle a été confortée par la tenue de plus de 90 événements sur le thème de l’importance de l’océan dans l’équilibre du climat, mais aussi de plus en plus pour illustrer concrètement comment les États peuvent inscrire, dans leurs contributions nationales, des solutions basées sur l’océan. C’est l’exemple du carbone bleu, ce sont toutes ces forêts de l’océan comme les mangroves, ce sont les énergies marines, c’est la réduction des émissions de gaz à effet de serre des navires.

Le texte final prévoit aussi un dialogue en juin 2020 et appelle les parties prenantes à présenter leurs contributions avant le 31 mars. Il faut que l’Union européenne se mobilise, rejoigne la communauté des amis de l’océan et intègre dans le pacte vert pour l’Europe, que je soutiens pleinement, une véritable stratégie globale sur l’océan.

  Pär Holmgren (Verts/ALE). – Fru talman! Som flera av talarna före mig har konstaterat så misslyckades ju tyvärr världen med mycket av de riktigt viktiga detaljerna i Madrid. Inte minst när det gäller hur ansvaret för omställningen framöver ska fördelas. Därför blir det ännu viktigare nu att just EU tar ett tydligt ledarskap och visar ambition och just ett tydligt ledarskap. Det här politiska ledarskapet, det måste bygga på ett helhetsperspektiv och, när det gäller klimatomställningen, en politik som bygger på vetenskap. Då räcker det inte med 50–55 procents minskning till 2030. Det räcker heller inte med klimatneutralitet så pass sent som 2050.

Men ett viktigt beslut togs i alla fall i Madrid, som media inte har rapporterat så mycket om. Världen enades om en ny femårig jämställdhetsplan för att göra klimatarbetet och Parisavtalet mer rättvist och jämställt. Det här är något som vi gröna har kämpat länge för i Europaparlamentet, för utan jämställdhet så klarar vi inte av de utmaningar som vi står inför.

Med stor sannolikhet så är 2020-talet, som vi är i full fart på väg in i nu, det sista årtiondet vi har om vi ska klara av att hålla den globala uppvärmningen under 2 grader. Och i novembernästa år är det , som vi alla vet, dags för nästa stora möte i Glasgow. Till dess måste vi höja ambitionerna och ta ett globalt ledarskap, i en tid då tyvärr ingen annan verkar vilja göra det.

  Laura Huhtasaari (ID). – Arvoisa puhemies, Eurooppa tekee kyllä osuutensa, mutta emme voi pelastaa koko maapalloa, sillä EU:n päästöt ovat 10 prosenttia maailman päästöistä. Ilmastotullit on ensi sijassa otettava käyttöön, ettei erityisesti Kiina voisi toimia enää ilmasto- ja kauppapolitiikan vapaamatkustajana.

EU:ssa olisi ymmärrettävä paremmin Suomen metsäteollisuuden puutarve eikä ideologisten vaikuttimien vuoksi hankaloitettava ydinvoimalahankkeiden rahoittamista. Luonto on jokaiselle ihmiselle tärkeä, mutta emme voi varjella luontoa, mikäli tärvelemme hyvinvointivaltion ja kansantalouden toimintaedellytykset.

Lajeja on kuollut sukupuuttoon lähes niin kauan, kun elämää on ollut. Arviolta 95 prosenttia koskaan eläneistä lajeista on kuollut sukupuuttoon. Ilmasto on aina muuttunut, ja lajeja on kuollut myös riippumatta ihmisen toiminnasta. Tällä hetkellä käynnissä oleva sukupuuttoaalto johtuu ihmisen toiminnasta. Suuria metsiä kaadetaan esimerkiksi viljelysten ja asutuksen tieltä.

1800-luvulla ihmisiä oli alle kaksi miljardia. Nyt meitä on vähän alle kahdeksan miljardia ja väestön vuosikasvun arvioidaan olevan noin 82 miljoonaa. Mitkään päästövähennykset eivät riitä, jos emme saa väestönkasvua hillittyä. Väestöräjähdys on ilmaston suurin haaste – siihen pitää löytää ratkaisuja.

EU:n ilmastopolitiikan lopputulema ei saa olla, että valtiot velkaantuvat, kansa köyhtyy ja ostovoima heikkenee. EU:n ilmastopolitiikka ei saa parantaa Aasian ja Yhdysvaltojen kansantalouksien kilpailukykyä Euroopan maiden kustannuksella, koska näin ollen maailmanlaajuisesti päästöt vain kasvavat. Tähän loppuun haluan toivottaa koko parlamentille oikein hyvää ”Merry Brexmasia”.

  Idoia Villanueva Ruiz (GUE/NGL). – Señora presidenta, voy a ser tan cruda como crudas son las consecuencias a las que nos enfrentamos con las actuales medidas.

El resultado de la COP25 es la firma de un genocidio anunciado. Dos visiones que enfrentan al mundo: los que defienden el capital y los que defienden la vida. No hay tiempo para Glasgow, el tiempo era ahora. La reducción de emisiones de CO2 para limitar el calentamiento global, la regulación de los mercados de carbono, la financiación del Fondo Verde para países más vulnerables siguen siendo tareas pendientes.

Hemos visto a las grandes empresas más contaminantes subvencionando a la COP, a gobiernos que lo permiten, sentados en sus consejos de administración, y a la internacional reaccionaria presionando para entorpecer los objetivos a través de trucos contables. No se puede luchar contra el cambio climático sin ambición. Y tampoco podemos, desde Europa, sin cuestionarnos el actual sistema, exigir responsabilidades individuales y no luchar contra los grandes contaminadores, mientras llevamos a cabo políticas continuistas que legitiman el saqueo de multinacionales o apuestan por acuerdos de libre comercio que destruyen nuestro tejido local.

Nuestro total apoyo para un compromiso ambicioso, valiente, vinculante, con recursos destinados a una transición justa. Se nos va el planeta en ello. Se nos va la vida en ello.

  Dolors Montserrat (PPE). – Señora presidenta, estarán todos de acuerdo en que lo mejor de la COP 25 ha sido la organización por parte de España, de nuestro alcalde Almeida y de nuestra presidenta Ayuso, porque los resultados no han sido los esperados.

Europa ha hecho los deberes con la presentación del Green Deal, pero el problema es que solo Europa hace los deberes. No solo tenemos que liderar dentro de la Unión, sino que tenemos que convencer y exigir fuera de la Unión Europea. Y déjenme que les diga a algunos que la lucha contra el cambio climático no es una foto ni un tuit, ni esperar que Greta solucione todos los desafíos. Porque la lucha contra el cambio climático no es algo banal, sino que es vital y responsabilidad de todos. Dentro de la UE debemos vencer las barreras que impone tanto el negacionismo de la extrema derecha como la histeria de la extrema izquierda.

Y para que el liderazgo de la UE sea verdadero necesitamos desbloquear el presupuesto plurianual: para financiar la transición justa, para no dejar a nadie atrás, para proteger el empleo y la economía. Solo así lideraremos de verdad la lucha contra el cambio climático.

  Mohammed Chahim (S&D). – Voorzitter, ik ben zeer teleurgesteld dat er in Madrid geen overeenkomst is bereikt. Een internationaal klimaatakkoord als dat van Parijs is natuurlijk geweldig, maar is zonder duidelijke afspraken over de uitvoering ervan niet meer dan loze woorden. Toch ben ik blij dat de EU haar ambities tijdens de onderhandelingen niet opzij heeft gezet en zich niet heeft geschikt naar de wil van minder ambitieuze, vervuilende landen zoals China, Brazilië, de Verenigde Staten en Australië. Beter geen akkoord dan een slecht akkoord.

De belangrijkste vraag is: hoe moet het nu verder? We moeten voor de volgende Conferentie van de Partijen in Glasgow stappen zetten. Daarvoor zijn twee dingen nodig.

Ten eerste biedt de European Green Deal een uitgelezen kans om de wereld niet alleen te tonen hoe het moet, maar vooral ook hoe het kan. Goed leiderschap doet volgen. Als de lidstaten dezelfde ambitie tonen als het Parlement en de Commissie, kunnen we onze doelstellingen in het kader van de Overeenkomst van Parijs daadwerkelijk verwezenlijken en ook de rest van de wereld aansporen mee te doen. De European Green Deal moet een succes worden!

Ten tweede moeten we als Europa niet alleen het goede voorbeeld geven, maar moeten we de dwarsliggers in deze wereld bovendien aanpakken en dwingen tot actie. We zijn de grootste consumentenmacht ter wereld en moeten onze positie beter benutten. We moeten de productie van goederen voor Europa verduurzamen en er strenge eisen aan stellen.

Wie niet wil meewerken aan een schoner klimaat en zijn industrie niet wil verduurzamen, moet dat aan de grens maar voelen.

  Katalin Cseh (Renew). – Madam President, it is a little ironic that we are talking about the outcome of COP 25 when there really wasn’t one. Simply agreeing to meet next year and hoping that world leaders can be more ambitious isn’t an outcome, but a failure. Failure to deliver and take meaningful action, failure to listen to science and evidence, and failure to live up to the expectations of citizens, who demand a safe and sustainable future.

In Madrid, we witnessed once again how political greed overpowers common sense. With the majority of big emitters unwilling to take climate change seriously, the EU must become an even more prominent world leader regarding climate protection, and I am aware of the criticism we receive. Commuting between two parliaments is terrible for the environment and, yes, we use way too much paper in this House but, on the global level, the European Parliament is probably the most ambitious and committed institution to fight climate change. The Members of this House must be the engines of change and the ambassadors of global climate action, and we need tools to do that. We need the right of initiative so we can issue our own proposals, and this step would be more impactful than the outcomes of COP 25.

  Jutta Paulus (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin! Vielen Dank, Herr Vizepräsident Timmermans und auch an die gesamte Kommission, dass Sie hart geblieben sind.

Denn wenn das Pariser-Abkommen hier in Madrid unterminiert worden wäre, das wäre ja wirklich fatal gewesen. Ich bin besonders froh, dass es für diesen sogenannten Emissionshandel jetzt keine faulen Regeln gibt. Denn das, was da in Artikel 6 beschrieben wird, ist eigentlich kein Emissionshandel. Es gibt nämlich keine Obergrenze – wie bei einem echten Emissionshandel –, sondern die Basis sind die nationalen Klimapläne. Da kann jedes Land selber reinschreiben, was es denn jetzt erreichen möchte.

Wenn ich jede zusätzliche Minderung, die über meinen Plan hinaus erreicht wird, teuer verkaufen kann, dann ist das natürlich ein Anreiz, die Messlatte möglichst niedrig zu legen. Deswegen ist es vielleicht gar nicht schlecht, wenn in diesem Bereich nichts erreicht worden ist.

Das heißt natürlich nicht, dass diese COP des Stillstands etwas Gutes ist. Im Gegenteil! Die Millionen Menschen, die auf die Straße gegangen sind, um Klimaschutz einzufordern, die sind enttäuscht, und sie haben gesehen, auf die Regierungen ist kein Verlass. Umso wichtiger ist es, dass jetzt die High Ambition Coalition – die Koalition der Ehrgeizigen –sich koordiniert und gut vorbereitet nach Glasgow fährt.

Ich glaube, mit einem ambitionierten Green Deal können wir da auch ein Vorbild sein, und wir unterstützen das sehr gerne.

  Herve Juvin (ID). – Madame la Présidente, personne ne peut se réjouir de l’échec de la COP de Madrid, qui signifie également l’échec de la COP de Paris, puisque la trajectoire souhaitée ne sera pas tenue et que nous nous éloignons des objectifs souhaités.

J’invite le Parlement et la Commission à réfléchir sur les raisons de ces échecs. Les grandes machineries mondialistes ne fonctionnent plus, l’insupportable prétention à détenir le monopole du bien et à imposer des solutions universelles pour faire le bien des peuples sans eux, voire contre eux, ne fonctionne plus.

C’est pourquoi nous devons regarder en face nos contradictions. Nous ne pouvons continuer à signer des traités de libre-échange tout en en déplorant les conséquences. Nous ne pouvons continuer à adhérer à une économie financiarisée, tout en regrettant les dommages créés partout dans le monde par l’extinction de la biodiversité et de la diversité humaine.

Je crois donc que plus de modestie, plus de solutions proches du terrain, plus d’efforts maîtrisés au plus près des PME, qui font l’économie de nos territoires, voilà probablement ce que l’Union européenne peut faire de mieux pour lutter contre les dérèglements écologiques.

  Πέτρος Κόκκαλης (GUE/NGL). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε Επίτροπε, κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι, ως μέλος της αντιπροσωπείας μας στην Μαδρίτη, ήμουν μάρτυρας της αποτυχίας της προσπάθειας της διεθνούς κοινότητας να καταλήξει σε Συμφωνία. Ήμουν μάρτυρας της αγωνίας 500.000 νέων ανθρώπων, στους δρόμους της Μαδρίτης, που απαιτούσαν άμεσα και αποτελεσματικά μέτρα. Ήμουν μάρτυρας της αγωνίας των μικρών νησιωτικών κρατών του Ειρηνικού που βουλιάζουν κυριολεκτικά. Ήμουν και μάρτυρας της αποτυχίας της νεοφιλελεύθερης «κυβέρνησης-δραπέτη» της Χιλής να ηγηθεί της διαδικασίας. Μάρτυρας της φονικής αδράνειας σκοταδιστικών ακροδεξιών κυβερνήσεων που συγκροτούν μια νέα μαύρη Διεθνή απέναντι στην προσπάθειά μας για την αποτροπή της κλιματικής καταστροφής. Ήμουν και μάρτυρας της αγωνιώδους προσπάθειας της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής να υπερασπιστεί την περιβαλλοντική και πολιτική ακεραιότητα της Συμφωνίας των Παρισίων.

Κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι, αν κάτι έμαθα στη Μαδρίτη είναι ότι έχουμε χρέος να ηγηθούμε του αγώνα για έναν ανθρώπινο κόσμο με κλιματική δικαιοσύνη και κλιματική ασφάλεια. Πρέπει να ηγηθούμε με το δικό μας παράδειγμα, με την εφαρμογή της Πράσινης Συμφωνίας για την κλιματική ουδετερότητα στο ίδιο μας το σπίτι. Είναι χρέος μας απέναντι στους νέους ανθρώπους και σε όλον τον κόσμο. Ραντεβού στη Γλασκόβη!

  Maria da Graça Carvalho (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, a COP25 não correu como se desejaria. Esperavam-se compromissos concretos em Madrid, mas questões como o artigo 6.º do Acordo de Paris, relativo aos mercados de carbono, ficaram ainda em aberto.

Em todo o caso, não creio que esta cimeira tenha sido em vão. Abordou-se pela primeira vez a situação dos oceanos, reconheceu-se um maior impacto das alterações climáticas nas mulheres, debateu-se o importante papel da ciência nos desafios que nos aguardam.

E esta foi uma COP muito participada pela sociedade civil, como pude verificar em Madrid: pelos jovens, que marcaram presença em números nunca antes vistos nestas cimeiras, mas também pelos mais velhos. Este é um sinal de esperança a retirar de Madrid. A ação climática não se faz apenas através de medidas aprovadas pelos governos. Exige a mobilização de toda a sociedade e a sociedade está claramente empenhada nestas batalhas. Cabe-nos a nós, políticos, reconhecer e valorizar esta motivação.

  Evin Incir (S&D). – Fru talman! Vi står inför humanitära katastrofer och vi kommer definitivt inte kunna nå FN:s hållbarhetsmål om vi inte agerar mer, och det nu. Klimatförändringarna kräver åtgärder på alla plan, både inom offentlig sektor och privat sektor. I dag står exempelvis 100 av världens storföretag för 71 procent av de totala utsläppen av växthusgaser.

Klimatet är inte en fråga om kanske, som vissa vill hävda. Klimatförändringar påverkar oss redan i dag, men kräver akuta åtgärder för att hållas under 1,5 graders ökning. Speciellt i samtalen med de mindre nationerna, som Maldiverna, på COP25 i Madrid förra veckan blev det än tydligare för mig hur akut läget är. Maldiverna skyddas och existerar just nu på grund av sina korallrev. Korallreven håller dock på att försvinna på grund av värmeökningen i vattnet.

Klimatförändringarna drabbar även utvecklingsländerna hårdast, samtidigt som de har minst resurser att klara ett förändrat klimat, och trots att många av dessa länder släpper ut åtskilligt mindre mängder koldioxid än andra länder. Det är uppenbart att insatser för att utrota fattigdomen, bevara planeten, skapa hållbar ekonomisk tillväxt för alla och främja social delaktighet är starkt kopplade till varandra.

COP25 må ha misslyckats, men jag är stolt över oss här i parlamentet, över kommissionen med Timmermans i spetsen och över det finska ordförandeskapet för att ha pushat EU-medlemsländerna att ta på sig ledartröjan för ett klimatneutralt Europa 2050. Men nu gäller det för både EU och medlemsländerna att gå från ord till handling.

  Caroline Voaden (Renew). – Madam President, 2019 is coming to an end, another year of record wildfires, floods, droughts and livelihoods destroyed under our watch. Another year of discussions on measures to stop climate change. Yet the COP25 failed to deliver on international trading rules. But we also failed to deliver on adaptation, on loss and damage, on reaching agreements to reduce vulnerability and increase resilience against the future natural disasters that the world will face. Discussing the outcomes of the COP25, let’s not lose focus on what’s at stake here. Let’s not forget who will suffer at the hands of climate change. According to the 2019 Climate Change Performance Index, there is today no country on earth that is heading towards the 1.5° target.

We as Brits are devastated that we will not be able to play our full part in driving forward stricter green targets within the European Union, as we will no longer sit at the table. During the COP25, the gap between the reality of our climate emergency and the pace of negotiations has been clear. The time for talking is over. I urge you now, as Members of the European Parliament and Union, to be a strong and ambitious voice in all future negotiations.

  Ville Niinistö (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, I think that the failures of Madrid give more light to the obvious prospect ahead of us that 2020 will be the crucial year for climate. That is the last year and the last COP when we actually still have a chance of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees, or even close to that.

However, I also think that there are some positives to take from the failures. There is more legitimacy in either making a good deal or no deal at all. There was a bad deal on the table and I applaud the Commission and the Presidency that you didn’t take that, because it would make it totally, utterly useless to have these COPs if we just give more room to those who just want to use climate for their business opportunities, get credits for free and not support climate legitimacy. So it’s good that we have brought the system to the brink of failure where all countries have to realise that we have to do more, that we have to deliver a good deal and that no facade is going to be enough. And this is the project for the European Union for next year. We need to deliver on the Green Deal at home and build on the alliances that we have with those countries that want to do more before the Glasgow meeting. Then we can succeed.

  Gianantonio Da Re (ID). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, quella che doveva essere la conferenza ONU sul cambiamento climatico più ambiziosa di sempre si è conclusa con un clamoroso fallimento.

Non è stato trovato alcun compromesso sull'articolo 6 dell'accordo di Parigi, che prevede la regolazione globale del mercato del carbonio e i grandi paesi inquinanti quali India, Cina e Stati Uniti hanno ribadito il loro no alla riduzione dei gas ad effetto serra.

Un meritato schiaffo all'Europa e ai suoi slogan sul cambiamento climatico che, non solo non portano nulla, ma danneggiano le aziende europee, costrette a subire la concorrenza dei grandi paesi inquinanti, che non intendono assolutamente intraprendere la transizione energetica voluta dall'Europa.

Cari colleghi, il fallimento della Conferenza ONU sul cambiamento climatico non sarà l'unico, ma molti altri ne seguiranno. Le nostre aziende e le nostre imprese non si confrontano con Greta, ma si confrontano con la concorrenza sleale di Cina, Stati Uniti e India. Quindi, cari signori, non dobbiamo essere solo noi, dobbiamo coinvolgere tutti, altrimenti sarà un fallimento continuo.

  Silvia Modig (GUE/NGL). – Arvoisa puhemies, Madrid oli pettymys ja odotukset Glasgow’n suhteen ovat entistä kovemmat. Jotta siellä päästään tarvittaviin päätöksiin, on EU:n näytettävä esimerkkiä ja otettava aito johtajuus. Artikla 6 on tavattoman tärkeä ja on hyvä, ettei EU hyväksynyt vesitettyjä ehtoja. Laskenta- ja raportointisäännöistä on päästävä sopimukseen niin, ettei kaksoislaskenta ole mahdollista ja että sekä ympäristötavoitteet että sosiaalinen oikeudenmukaisuus turvataan.

Nyt meidän tulee selvästi viestiä kaikille kumppaneillemme suunnanmuutoksen välttämättömyydestä. Meidän tulee käyttää kaikki keinot mukaan lukien kauppapolitiikka. Jotta seuraavassa kokouksessa saadaan sovittua valtioiden 2030-sitoumusten riittävästä kiristämisestä, on meidän aloitettava nostamalla kovaa tavoitettamme. Meidän tulee tehdä kauppakumppaneillemme selväksi, ettemme tule antamaan epäreilua kilpailuetua niille, jotka eivät kanna vastuutaan, vaan luomme tarvittaessa hiilitullin EU:n rajalle, ja että tulemme kauppasopimukselta vaatimaan aiempaa tiukempia ympäristösäännöksiä ja aloitamme sen Mercosurista.

  Μαρία Σπυράκη (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, Αντιπρόεδρε Timmermans, όσοι από εμάς συμμετείχαν στη Διάσκεψη της Μαδρίτης δεν βίωσαν μόνο μια χαμένη ευκαιρία αλλά βρέθηκαν αντιμέτωποι και με μία πανίσχυρη εικόνα των δυσκολιών που αντιμετωπίζει η εφαρμογή της Συμφωνίας του Παρισιού. Ως Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, έχουμε και επιχειρούμε να διατηρήσουμε την πρωτοπορία στην αντιμετώπιση της κλιματικής αλλαγής, μετεξελίσσoντας την οικονομία μας μέσω της Πράσινης Συμφωνίας και φιλοδοξώντας να δημιουργήσουμε νέες και καλές θέσεις εργασίας. Μόνο που η Πράσινη Συμφωνία οφείλει να στηρίξει ιδιαίτερα τις χώρες και τις περιφέρειες που πρωτοπορούν στην απεξάρτηση από τον άνθρακα, όπως είναι η Ελλάδα που θέλει να έχει αποσύρει τις παλαιές μονάδες έως το 2023 και να έχει αποκλείσει τον άνθρακα από το ενεργειακό της μίγμα έως το 2028.

Η ταχύτητα της απαλλαγής των ευρωπαϊκών οικονομιών από τον άνθρακα πρέπει να αποτελεί καθοριστικό κριτήριο για την παροχή στήριξης για τη μετάβαση. Ο κόσμος μας βλέπει, όπως λέτε Αντιπρόεδρε Timmermans, και οφείλουμε να κινητοποιήσουμε όλες τις χώρες να αναλάβουν τις ευθύνες τους - επιβραβεύοντας τους πρωτοπόρους.

  Sándor Rónai (S&D). – Elnök asszony! Mi vagyunk az utolsó generáció, akik még tehetünk a klímaváltozás és a klímakatasztrófa ellen. Nekünk maradt csak időnk arra, és már csak annyi időnk maradt, hogy megoldásokat találjunk a klímakatasztrófa következményeire. Az Unió vezetői, az Unió politikusai pontosan tudják, hogy késedelemre nincs lehetőség, azonnal cselekednünk kell. Sokan mondják azt, hogy de Amerika, India és Kína – nos, én ennél büszkébb európai vagyok. Európa példát fog mutatni, és Európa fogja sikerre vezetni azt a harcot, amit a klímaváltozás ellen vívunk.

Ne felejtsük el, mindnyájunknak közös felelőssége, hogy sikerrel vegyük ezt a kihívást. Az európai zöld megállapodás akkor lehet sikeres, ha egy új társadalmi szerződésként működik, amelyet mindenki elfogad, és mindenki a magáénak érez. Erőt kell merítenünk a küzdelemhez azokból az emberekből, azokból a fiatalokból, akik Európa-szerte milliónyian küzdenek a klímaváltozás ellen, a jövőjükért. Politikai döntéshozóknak, civileknek, gazdasági és ipari szereplőknek és minden európai polgárnak közösen kell küzdenie, és akkor sikerülhet.

  Fredrick Federley (Renew). – Fru talman! Det råder ingen tvekan om att COP25 var ett misslyckande. Men då kan man ju hantera det på olika sätt. Man kan beklaga det misslyckandet och ladda inför nästa år, när vi fortfarande har chansen att göra någonting. Men så hör jag en del kollegor, framför allt på högerytterkanten, som låtsas vara missnöjda. Men de är ju egentligen otroligt nöjda, för det här är vad de har velat hela tiden. De vill stoppa klockorna. De vill inte vara med i omställningen till det gröna samhället. Och det råder ingen tvekan om mitt förakt för deras typ av politik.

Men om någon nu av de där högertokarna var härinne och lyssnade till mitt inlägg, så skulle jag ge dem en chans att ändra sig. Det är för att vi ska sjösätta Green Deal under detta år. Ni har chansen att vara med och stötta det politiska projektet mot en ny ekonomi, nya jobb, nya framtidsutsikter. Men när vi nu debatterar de viktiga klimatfrågorna och när vi kommer debattera Green Deal så kommer ni inte att vara konstruktiva, ni kommer inte att vara här och bidra. Så var ärliga och säg att ni är glada åt den här utkomsten och möt väljarna som tar upp gatorna tvärs över världen, se dem i ögonen och säg: ”Vi bryr oss inte.”

  Michael Bloss (Verts/ALE). – Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrter Herr Timmermans! Das Jahr 2019, das ist das Jahr der Klimabewegung.

Überall auf der Welt haben sich die Menschen gegen die Zerstörung unseres Planeten erhoben, und wir hier im Haus, wir haben die climate emergency ausgerufen. Ausgerechnet in diesem Jahr, da scheitert die Klimakonferenz. Was für eine Blamage!

Aber viele Menschen, die sind schon einen Schritt weiter: Die entwickeln die Technik der dekarbonisierten Welt von morgen, die gehen freitags für das Klima auf die Straße, und die warten auf die schwerfällige Politik.

Im nächsten Jahr muss die Politik nachziehen, das bedeutet für Sie, Herr Timmermans, Anfang des Jahres zu sagen, wieviel Klimaambition Sie wirklich wollen. Das bedeutet, ein echtes Klimaschutzgesetz vorzulegen, sodass die nächste Klimakonferenz in einem Jahr in Glasgow ein Erfolg wird.

Im Jahr 2020 geht es für das Klima um alles. Herr Timmermans, enttäuschen Sie die Menschen in diesem Klimajahr 2020 nicht!

  Teuvo Hakkarainen (ID). – Arvoisa puhemies, ministeri Tuppurainen, suurin toivein odotettu Madridin ilmastokokous päättyi täydelliseen mahalaskuun. Toki Madridin hotellit saivat piristysruiskeen, kun 27 000 henkeä matkusti kokoukseen. Kokouksen alla huomion vei huomionhakuinen ruotsalainen koululainen, jonka pitäisi olla koulussa ja joka joutui matkustamaan saksalaisen junan ensimmäisessä luokassa. Oikeastaan muuta raportoitavaa kokouksesta ei jäänytkään. Suomessa ilmastoon hurahtanut hallitus nimittäin käyttää jokaisen mahdollisuuden kansalaisten rankaisemiseen lisäveroilla ilmastoa tekosyynä käyttäen. Selvisi myös, että EU aikoo syytää 100 miljardia ilmastorahoitukseen kehitysmaille. Ne menevät sinne poppaukkojen kattiloihin. Kokouksesta taisikin tulla konsulttien tilipäivä, ei kansalaisten.

  Manuel Bompard (GUE/NGL). – Madame la Présidente, mes chers collègues, Monsieur le Commissaire, n’ayons pas peur des mots: malgré la pression de la jeunesse du monde entier, la COP25 est un fiasco. J’entends ici que nous aurions bien agi, mais que les autres sont irresponsables. C’est trop facile.

D’abord, car nos propres objectifs sont insuffisants. Pour respecter l’objectif de 1,5°C inclus dans les accords de Paris, nous devons réduire nos émissions de gaz à effet de serre d’au moins 65 % d’ici à 2030. Et nous devons fixer cet objectif au plus vite, sans attendre la COP26, pour montrer l’exemple et exercer un effet d’entraînement.

Ensuite, car nous continuons à nouer des accords commerciaux avec ceux dont nous dénonçons ici l’inaction. Car qui refuse de rehausser ses objectifs? Les États-Unis, le Canada, le Japon, le Brésil, notamment. Mais qui a signé un accord de libre-échange avec le Japon, avec le Canada? Qui en prépare un avec le Mercosur ou les États-Unis? C’est vous; c’est la Commission européenne.

Bref, ne soyons pas hypocrites, mettons enfin en conformité nos paroles et nos actes: c’est l’avenir de notre écosystème que nous avons entre nos mains.

  Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Paní předsedající, já se připojuji ke svým kolegům, když musím poukázat na to, že výsledek madridské konference nebyl úspěch. V rozporu s očekáváním se státům bohužel nepodařilo nalézt shodu na pravidlech pro vytvoření globálního systému obchodování s uhlíkem a na směřování nových finančních prostředků do zemí, které čelí dopadům klimatické změny.

Chci poděkovat panu komisaři, že dokázali Pařížskou dohodu uhájit, kdy se státy v roce 2015 v Paříži dohodly na revizi svých závazků v oblasti klimatu do roku 2020. Avšak proti ambicióznějším závazkům se postavily země jako Čína, Indie, Brazílie s poukazem na to, že by to mělo být nyní rozhodnutí každé země a že pokud mají být přijaty důraznější formulace směrem ke zvyšování ambicí, pak jedině za předpokladu, že bohaté země jim poskytnou odpovídající finanční podporu.

Evropská unie odmítla rozdílný přístup k bohatým a rozvojovým zemím s tím, že je třeba se zaměřit na budoucí ambice podle Pařížské dohody, která se vztahuje na všechny země. Já toto rozhodnutí považuji za správné.

  Carlos Zorrinho (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, desde a assinatura do Acordo de Paris, em 2015, que as sucessivas cimeiras do clima, incluindo a COP25 têm vindo a frustrar expectativas e a ser incapazes de dar resposta a uma sociedade civil cada vez mais ativa e interventiva, pedindo aos responsáveis políticos mais ações e mais ambição.

A União Europeia respondeu ao apelo da sociedade civil apresentando a semana passada o Pacto Ecológico Europeu. Foi com esse compromisso que Ursula von der Leyen e Frans Timmermans assumiram em Madrid a vontade de transformar o Pacto Ecológico Europeu num pacto ecológico global.

Não ficámos a falar sozinhos, mas tivemos menos seguidores do que seria necessário. Apenas 84 países se comprometeram a apresentar planos mais ambiciosos em 2020, seguindo o apelo Secretário-Geral da ONU, António Guterres.

Particularmente insatisfatória foi a ausência de acordo em relação ao artigo 6.º referente aos mercados de carbono, cuja negociação ficou paralisada há um ano, em Katowice, e que mais uma vez não foi possível desbloquear em Madrid.

Este não é um tempo de desistir, mas sim de lutar pelo exemplo, sobretudo pelo exemplo das ações em concreto. Por isso, as ações devem ser financiadas de forma transversal e justa. Depois desta cimeira, a aplicação da taxa de carbono é mais urgente do que nunca.

  Marie Toussaint (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, l’histoire retiendra que nous étions schizophrènes. Le matin, nous parlions de climat et ce soir, nous nous apprêtons à adopter une liste de projets dits d’intérêt communautaire, qui entérinera pour plusieurs décennies la dépendance de l’Union aux énergies fossiles. C’est en totale contradiction avec l’urgence écologique.

Lors de la COP25, les représentants des îles Tuvalu nous ont alertés, en affirmant que nier les millions de victimes du réchauffement climatique constituait un crime. Il est temps d’être cohérents.

L’échec de la COP25 renforce encore la responsabilité historique de l’Union européenne. Nous devons affirmer que les lois de l’économie ne sont pas supérieures aux lois de la nature. Nous devons cesser de considérer notre Terre comme une chose à dominer, violer et exploiter en toute impunité. Nous devons reconnaître, condamner les crimes d’écocides, nous devons garantir la justice environnementale. Notre poids dans le monde est tel que le climat ne sera pas sauvé sans nous. Après le terrible échec de la COP25, l’Europe doit ouvrir la voie.

  Michal Wiezik (PPE). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, áno, môžeme skonštatovať, že COP25 skončil neúspechom, očakávania ľudí nebolo naplnené a nastalo sklamanie. No predsa by som to rád uchopil z toho pozitívneho konca.

Zlyhal COP25, nie Európska únia. Prišli sme s ambicióznym plánom Green Deal-u a už teraz je vidieť, ako inšpiruje mnohé krajiny vo svete. Našou úlohou je dokázať, že ekonomika kompatibilná s planétou je možná a v podstate nevyhnutná. Som hrdý na to, že som súčasťou Európskej únie, ktorá sa otvorene hlási ku klimatickej neutralite, ochrane biodiverzity, zelenej politike a ktorá hľadá aktívne riešenia. Sme prví vo svete, ktorí sa touto cestou vydali, a viem, že náš úspech bude úspechom pre všetkých. Ak budeme úspešní, pridajú sa k nám nakoniec všetci. Už na ďalšom COP-e ich bude istotne viac.

  Liudas Mažylis (PPE). – Dėkoju, pone Primininke. Madride konstatuota, kad yra skubus poreikis naujiems įsipareigojimams dėl klimato kaitos. Bet tai turbūt ir visas pozityvas. Bendri rezultatai konferencijoje veikiau nuviliantys. Šiaip mokslas neginčytinai įrodė, kokie yra klimato kaitos faktoriai. Tačiau politinė valia skirtinguose pasaulio regionuose, kaip matome, yra skirtinga. Nesutarta dėl naujų lėšų nukreipimo šalims, patiriančioms klimato kaitos padarinius, sistemos. Nesutariama ir dėl paties termino – ambicijos. Mums, Europoje, šiandien tai jau reiškia konkrečius Žaliojo kurso teisinius, finansinius, įgyvendinimo aspektus. Kad ir ambicija iki 2030 m. sumažinti anglies dioksido emisijas bent perpus lyginant su 1990 m. lygiu. Taip nuosekliai siekiame klimato neutralumo 2050-aisiais. Taigi Europa ėmėsi ryškios lyderystės ir ją turime išlaikyti. Būsimus forumus panaudoti diskusijomis su kitais pasauliniais veikėjais ir tęsti artėjimą link Paryžiaus susitarimo tikslų, o svarbiausia atliepti Europos ir pasaulio piliečių lūkesčius.

  Marian-Jean Marinescu (PPE). – Doamnă președintă, domnule vicepreședinte, și în documentele emise de Comisie, și în poziția Parlamentului, se cere ca toate măsurile să fie luate pe baza unor studii de impact. Aș dori ca introducerea în ETS a transportului maritim, precum și procentul de transfer de la rutier, la fluvial și la cale ferată de 75 %, cât ați propus dumneavoastră, precum și trecerea de la 40 % la 50 % în 2030 să fie luate pe baza unor studii de impact solide.

De asemenea, să existe o coordonare între dumneavoastră și toate direcțiile generale pentru luarea acestor măsuri, să faceți ceva pentru a avea acorduri globale, în special să urgentăm CORSIA pentru aviație și să încercăm ceva pentru transportul maritim. Aș vrea să vă întreb, planul pentru investiții pe care îl propuneți dumneavoastră în documentul dumneavoastră se bazează pe bani noi sau pe transferul de alte linii bugetare?

  Die Präsidentin. – Damit kommen wir zu den spontanen Wortmeldungen.

Ich werde nicht alle drannehmen können. Aber ich versuche es so auf die Fraktionen zu verteilen, dass wir halbwegs ausgewogen sind.

Spontane Wortmeldungen

  Ljudmila Novak (PPE). – Gospa predsednica, ali je bila konferenca v Madridu res zaman? Tukaj smo slišali veliko razočaranje, ker ni bilo doseženega želenega uspeha. Pa vseeno menim, da konferenca ni zaman. Včasih se tistim, ki imamo otroke, zdi, kot da nas ne slišijo, kaj govorimo, pa vendar nekoč, nekje, se tudi to govorjenje pozna na njihovem vedenju. Tako sem prepričana, da Evropska unija ne sme odnehati, ampak mora nadaljevati svojo pot, izpeljati zeleni dogovor in dokazati, da so ti ukrepi izvedljivi, da se da uresničiti podnebne ukrepe.

Države, ki najbolj onesnažujejo zrak imajo tudi same največje težave in razmere jih bodo prisilile do nujnih ukrepov, žal morda zelo prepozno. Evropa mora biti zgled.

  Julie Ward (S&D). – Madam President, it’s a tragedy that 30 governments failed to reach an agreement on carbon markets at COP 25. It’s a tragedy for small island developing states, for indigenous people, for young people. It’s a tragedy for the natural world. Yet there is consensus that we need an energy transition, as well as nature-based solutions with a focus on oceans and forests, to balance our global climate. COP25 was a historic opportunity for collective action on the key issue of our time. The Climate Emergency will not go away: it will become more lethal. And whilst I welcome the Green Deal proposed by the Commission, I know that if we really want to address the twin crises of climate change and poverty, we must be honest about the failure of neoliberal austerity policies.

The Green New Deal proposed by DiEM25 is a far more holistic and realistic plan, which recognises the links between the climate emergency, poverty and migration. Millions of young people all over the world are fighting for our planet. They’re declaring we have one home, we share it and we must protect it.

  Billy Kelleher (Renew). – Madam President, firstly I want to welcome the Commission’s Green Deal and the announcement last week. I think it’s important that we, as a European Union, show leadership in a global context. There is no doubt that there are a lot of climate deniers out there. We look at President Trump, we look at Brazil, we look at many other countries which simply do not accept that there is a global crisis in our midst at the moment. So from that context, while COP was a failure in terms of actually bringing forward a meaningful policy, it does highlight the fact that there are many countries out there which simply will continue to jeopardise the climate for economic gain alone, without taking a holistic approach.

I would urge that we would look at it from an economic point of view and an environmental point of view. We also need to enhance our diplomatic efforts, as a European Union, across the globe to encourage countries in the context of the next COP to be serious about bringing forward tangible proposals that will actually have a meaningful impact on how we transition to a carbon neutral world and save the planet.

  Ellie Chowns (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, as a British Green I have experienced two significant disappointments in the last few days: first of all, the result of the British general election and, secondly, the failure of COP25 to make sufficient progress. That is an especially bitter disappointment because of the unprecedented green wave of protests that we’ve seen over the last year calling for unity around the science, and those citizens are disappointed.

As Mr Timmermans said, our task is now more urgent than ever and we in Europe have a particular historic responsibility. I am actually tired of hearing excuses from other Members of this House about the responsibilities of China and so forth. We owe a carbon debt to low-income countries, in particular, for the loss and damage caused by climate change. We need to put our own house in order; we cannot keep kicking that can down the road.

Now my country, the UK, is hosting COP26 next year and I have a message to Boris Johnson, our new Prime Minister: ‘The world is watching. Will you sell out climate change with a race to the bottom trade deal with Trump or will you step up?’ The world is watching, not waiting. We will continue to mobilise until action matches the urgency of the climate crisis.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). – Senhora Presidente, passaram 4 anos desde o Acordo de Paris. Fizeram-se várias proclamações de emergência climática desde então. Do ponto de vista de uma concreta redução das emissões de gases com efeito de estufa para a atmosfera, o efeito prático do acordo foi nulo.

Não foram ainda definidas metas concretas de redução coerentes com os objetivos fixados em Paris. É certo que, com frequência, os objetivos proclamados dão guarida a outro tipo de objetivos, talvez menos nobres, menos mobilizadores. Basta ver o desfile das multinacionais que patrocinaram a conferência de Madrid.

Tão ou mais importante que os objetivos são os meios, os instrumentos definidos para os alcançar. Dizem-nos muito sobre os interesses que lideram determinados processos. Talvez não por acaso, um desses instrumentos, o mercado do carbono, esteve no centro da discussão em Madrid, tendo despoletado contradições que inviabilizaram o acordo. Ora, a monetarização do carbono, a compra e venda do direito a poluir a atmosfera serve indisfarçáveis interesses, não serve os interesses dos povos, nem objetivos ambientais genuínos.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – Madam President, one thing I’m pleased about is that we are calling COP25 what it was: a failure. There were times in the past where there were fudges, where there were statements saying that there was progress made, blah, blah, blah. Nothing really happened. At least now we are saying what it is and I congratulate Commissioner Timmermans and the others for so doing.

It also, of course, gives us an opportunity – and particularly the new Commission which cannot be blamed obviously for the failure last week – now to use the next 12 months to put pressure on the big emitters, those who are fudging and not living up to their commitments, to so do in 12 months’ time, and also to use our trading strength, especially in relation to future trade agreements; that countries will not be entertained if their products are not sustainable according to the promises and commitments they gave in Paris a few years ago. I think if we can do that we will send a message to the rest of the world, and hopefully this time next year, we’ll be talking about COP26, as the COP on COP.

  César Luena (S&D). – Señora presidenta, déjeme que destaque, en primer lugar, la buena organización que España ha llevado a cabo, y, señorías, veamos el buen lado de la historia. Es verdad que no se ha llegado a un acuerdo en el nivel de ambición que teníamos de los compromisos de reducción, en el artículo 6 sobre los mercados de carbono, pero ha habido un papel impecable de liderazgo de la Unión Europea, y, por eso, más de ochenta países han decidido aumentar sus compromisos de reducción.

Tenemos que celebrar también el marco general que se ha adoptado: el Pacto Verde Europeo; aquí está el vicepresidente Timmermans que lo lidera. Por tanto, la Unión Europea no puede, señorías, dar muestras de flaqueza. Somos el modelo de referencia para el resto del mundo. No estamos solos en esta travesía. Son cada vez más países los que siguen nuestro modelo.

Y tenemos que luchar y trabajar para que la próxima COP de Glasgow sea el éxito de los mercados de carbono, de la fiscalidad ambiental y de la implantación —es verdad— definitiva y eficaz, de los acuerdos de París.

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)

  Frans Timmermans, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, it is very difficult to overstate the importance of COP26 in Glasgow next year. So what we should be doing, starting from today, is to prepare well, as the European Union, for that COP. This is a combination of doing the right things in Europe and, at the same time, being extremely active on the international scene in climate diplomacy. And these are not two different things. You cannot separate these two roles. You need to do the same thing, both at the same time.

What are the concrete things we should do internally to prepare? First of all, we need to prepare our climate law so that we can show the rest of the world that we put into law our commitment to be climate neutral by 2050. To do that, we should also indicate clearly what we would be doing intermittently because 2050 is a long way from now, but 2030 isn’t. It’s almost tomorrow, it’s only 10 years, but we should be able to determine what we do in 2030.

To determine that precisely, we will do an impact assessment, but we need to do it in time so that we are timely in preparing our climate law and preparing the clear targets for 2030 so we can take that to the international conference. At the same time, we need to be rather quick in preparing a strategy that offers a future to our farming community with a From Farm to Fork strategy, which says clearly that we need our farmers more than before but in a different way.

We should also look at ETS. Where can we improve the ETS system? What is it going to do on shipping? How are we going to apply it in the airline area? What are we doing with different sectors in our economy on ETS, etc., etc.? These things are urgent and we need to work on all these things at the same time. What are we going to do in our building environment? What are we going to do on biodiversity, which is intimately linked to this?

I am mentioning all these subjects because, when you look at a conference like COP, on the surface it looks to be about emissions, but emissions are part of a much broader spectrum. What we’re proposing in the Green Deal is to actually reset our economy. Our economy, our system, our welfare, our well—being depends almost fully today on carbon and we are dependent on that. We’re addicted to that. So we need to get rid of that addiction and we need to make sure that we can create the same level – or better levels – of well—being, welfare and prosperity without having to depend on carbon.

That is a paradigm shift of unprecedented proportion – and it can only happen if we convince other parts of the world to follow suit because I do agree with those who say that if we only do this in Europe, it’s only 9% of emissions and it will not have the effect we want on a global scale.

But what is also true is that if we don’t do it in Europe, we will have no arguments to convince others. I experienced – and I hope colleagues had the same experience in Madrid – a lot of interest in many parts of the world for the European Green Deal and also a lot of interest in the idea of setting a target of being climate neutral in 2050.

The rest of the international community is waking up to the fact that this is a completely new way of looking at things. It is no longer believing, like we did many years ago, that by taking incremental steps, eventually we’ll get there. We’re turning things round. We’re saying this is where we need to be in 2050 and then we take steps back until today and then we can chart exactly what needs to be done until then.

Our proposal is not a blueprint, it’s a roadmap. It would give us the opportunity, also through a climate pact, to make sure that the people who are on the streets, the people who have a stake in this – whether it’s in industry or in agriculture or in academia or in trade unions – are part of the conversation and the decision—making. That’s what the climate pact will be.

So this is, I believe, what the European Union has to offer to the rest of the world and we do it for the next generations. We do it because it’s inevitable. We do it because not doing it would be relinquishing our duty in light of the facts that can no longer be disputed, and in light of what science is telling us. We do not have the luxury to sit on our hands. We do not have the luxury to ignore this. We have the duty to act.

  Tytti Tuppurainen, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, I wish to thank you for this very useful and timely debate. It is indeed disappointing that after years of hard work, and especially during the last two weeks, we could not agree on Article 6, providing incentives to reduce emissions now, and especially in the future.

As I said, the EU showed both determination and flexibility in order to reach the best possible results, notably as regards ambition and Article 6.

However, it is very difficult to negotiate with parties which refuse to engage. Eventually, under these circumstances, our negotiators considered it safer to refrain from accepting a very bad deal on Article 6.

But at the same time we are happy that we managed to complete the second review of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage. This enables us to enhance our capacity to mobilise and catalyse effective action for averting, minimising and addressing loss and damage associated with climate change targets.

I also welcome the new Gender Action Plan. It strengthens gender considerations and women’s participation in climate action and highlights the important role of women as agents of change.

Dear friends, I’m sure this debate will contribute to informing a period of reflection in view of the forthcoming negotiations. I would especially like to thank Commissioner Timmermans for his passion and commitment to hard work.

Next year, dear friends, must be the year of increasing ambition. It must be the year of hope and the year of a high—quality agreement.

  Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 171)

  Robert Biedroń (S&D), na piśmie. – Powiedzieć, że szczyt klimatyczny ONZ – COP25 miał pecha, to mało. Można go podsumować krótko: brak porozumienia. Zabrakło porozumienia w zakresach takich jak handel emisjami, wspólne ramy czasowe, wspólne metryki jakości powietrza, raportowanie, ambicje i cele klimatyczne. Udało się tylko ustalić, że mamy kryzys klimatyczny i trzeba działać. Doprawdy odkrywcze. Komisarz Timmermans ma za zadanie zwiększyć unijny cel redukcyjny na 2030 r. z 40% do 50%, a jednocześnie dążyć do zwiększenia go do 55 % w sposób odpowiedzialny. Co w tym czasie robi Polska? Rząd ogłasza sukces szczytu, ponieważ nikt nie kazał nam odchodzić od węgla. Opublikowany w listopadzie projekt Polityki Energetycznej Polski do 2040 roku – zakłada, że w 2030 roku węgiel wciąż będzie miał między 56 a 60 % udziału w wytwarzaniu energii elektrycznej. Jak powiedział kiedyś Orlando A. Battista: „błąd nie staje się pomyłką, dopóki nie odmówisz jego poprawienia”, przestańmy więc używać natury jako karty kredytowej bez limitu. Czas na zdecydowane działania, a ostatni szczyt w Madrycie pokazuje, że nie wszyscy zdają sobie sprawę z powagi sytuacji.

  Łukasz Kohut (S&D), na piśmie. – Szanowny Panie Przewodniczący! Jestem posłem ze Śląska, z Rybnika. W moim mieście poziom zanieczyszczeń powietrza potrafi przekroczyć normy o 1000 procent przez kilka miesięcy w roku. W Polsce z powodu zanieczyszczenia powietrza umiera przedwcześnie 44 tys. osób. To tak, jakby co roku znikało z jej mapy miasto większe niż Mikołów. Badania naukowe przeprowadzone przez Klinikę Pediatrii i Klinikę Neurochirurgii Dziecięcej w Katowicach wykazują ścisłą korelację pomiędzy oddychaniem smogiem a wyższą niż przeciętna zachorowalnością na guzy ośrodkowego układu nerwowego u dzieci. To są fakty niezaprzeczalne i przerażające.

I dlatego chciałbym wyrazić głębokie rozczarowanie rezultatami szczytu klimatycznego w Madrycie, a raczej brakiem tych rezultatów. Brak porozumienia oznacza, że wszystkie kraje będą musiały na nowo opracować swoje koncepcje klimatyczne. Czyli wracamy do punktu wyjścia, odwlekamy decyzje w czasie, a – powiedzmy sobie jasno – tego czasu już nie mamy!

Mam nadzieję, że Komisja Europejska, przygotowując stanowisko Unii na kolejną konferencję klimatyczną w Glasgow, będzie nadal działać ambitnie i bezkompromisowo, bo co do Parlamentu nie mam żadnych wątpliwości. My czujemy na naszych barkach odpowiedzialność za przyszłość planety i kolejnych pokoleń. Gorąco apeluję więc do wszystkich instytucji Unii i rządów o zrozumienie powagi sytuacji, porozumienie ponad podziałami i intensywną współpracę nad Nowym Zielonym Ładem dla Europy.

  Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE), kirjallinen. – Arvoisa puhemies, olen järkyttynyt kasvavasta kuilusta todellisuuden ja tarvittavien toimenpiteiden sekä poliittisten sitoumusten välillä. Madridissa ei saavutettu sitä, mitä tarvittaisiin ilmastonmuutoksen torjuntaan tai edes riittävään hillintään. COP25 on osoitus politiikan tämänhetkisestä kyvyttömyydestä. Nyt on kiire, koska ympäristön raju huononeminen ei odota. Positiivista on se, että tiedämme haasteen, meillä on teknologia, resurssit ja rahat kestävän kehityksen mukaiseen elämäntapaan. Nyt entistä suurempi vastuu lankeaa yrityksille, kiertotalouden keinoille sekä kestävälle rahoitukselle. Green Deal on tärkeä aloite, jonka myötä EU:n odotetaan ottavan sekä sisäisesti että globaalisti vetovastuu ilmastonmuutoksen torjunnasta. Merkittävimpinä esityksinä pidän ilmastolakia, olemassa olevan ilmastolainsäädännön päivittämistä, hiilitulleja, kiertotalouden seuraavaa vaihetta sekä kestävää ruokaa ja rakennuksia. Myös turhan paljon varjoon jäänyt luonnonmonimuotoisuuden rappeutuminen nostettiin esille osana Green Dealia. Poliittinen johtajuus on EU:n vastuulla. Tämä tulee tarkoittamaan paljon korkeampaa kunnianhimoa EU:n ilmastopolitiikassa. Meidän on moninkertaistettava ponnistelumme, jos aiomme vastata ilmastonmuutoksen haasteeseen. Mitä pidemmälle ratkaisua lykkäämme, sitä nopeampia ja rajumpia toimia tarvitaan ja sitä suurempia ovat haitoista aiheutuvat kustannukset.