On 29th September GLOBE EU hosted the event xxxx with the technical support of the Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP), with the contribution of Ms Catherine McGlade, Exec Dir or the European Environment Agency. MEPs discussed the indispensable elements of an adequate deal in Copenhagen and the priority issues on which Europe needs to focus before and in response to the Copenhagen deal, since there is a need to continue to pursue climate action through other avenues to deliver EU and global emission reductions. MEPs and speakers formulated a list of opportunities to exert political pressure in the run-up to the COP15.

This was an informal event but conclusions could be drawn on three themes: key aspects of a successful international deal in Copenhagen; putting Copenhagen in context, by seeing COP15 not in isolation but as part of wider ongoing efforts to reduce global emissions; and the role of MEPs in promoting an ambitious international deal.

Important elements of a successful international deal in Copenhagen were considered to be:

    • Adequacy and reliability of financing for developing countries – Financing is needed to support mitigation, adaptation and monitoring efforts. Oxfam is calling for €50 billion per year based on current needs; this does not take account of potential future worsening of climate needs. Some other estimates were higher. It was noted that the costs of adaption and supporting the developing world will increase until there is adequate action on mitigation. The Commission’s financing paper was considered a good starting point, which acknowledges the scale of the challenge. However, from the proposal it remains unclear where some of the funding will originate from; proposed contributions by developing countries appear unfair and contrary to the Bali agreement. Certain assumptions were considered unrealistic, for example, that developing countries would be able to make serious efficiency gains without the use of public financing.

    • Offsetting and over reliance on reductions from developing countries – Proposed high levels of offsetting permitted in the EU could result in significant challenges. Firstly, there is a risk that Europe, and others, are making use of the ‘low hanging fruit’ to meet their own needs and leaving the developing countries to address more expensive options. Secondly, the reliance on offsetting coupled with proposals to require reductions by developing countries could mean that more than 50% of total reductions would be delivered from developing countries. This seems perverse given their relative poverty and their limited per capita contribution to emissions.

    • The adequacy of EU emission reduction targets – The 20% and 30% targets are both insufficient to meet the scientific need and responsibilities of the EU.

    • The adequacy of global ambition – Modelling by the EEA suggests that when all the current government offers for Copenhagen are put together we are far from achieving the 2°C stabilisation target. We, ‘therefore, need a quantum shift in our thinking or to start to face the consequences’.

    • The need for a credible system for monitoring reductions – In the absence of a clear monitoring mechanism for emission reductions there is a substantive risk of double counting, misreporting of reductions and corruption, resulting in international commitments being unenforceable or even meaningless. The need for an effective global Carbon Accounting system was raised by the EEA.

Copenhagen and its place in the world

Whilst vital, Copenhagen negotiations are only one part of the climate policy jigsaw not an end in itself. Before and in response to Copenhagen there is a need to continue to pursue climate action through other avenues to deliver EU and global emission reductions. Issues identified as potential priorities for Europe were:

    • Delivering existing commitments – at present there are concerns that some Member States do not have the capacity or political commitment to deliver existing requirements under EU law by 2020. The Parliament can usefully take a role in promoting the fulfilment of requirements, overseeing implementation, securing adequate monitoring and compliance systems.

    • Filling the gaps in EU policy ‐ There are substantive sectors yet to face EU mitigation targets, transport by road and sea and agriculture were specifically mentioned. The importance of forests and soils in Europe, and beyond, as carbon stores was also highlighted. Europe could make an impact on global carbon balances by securing legislation to prioritise the maintenance and improvement of these resources.

    • Capitalising on Europe’s power as a trading bloc ‐ Beyond international negotiations the EUcan have a substantive impact upon global decisions, not least through setting ambitious product standards. This helps to deliver green jobs in Europe and beyond, but additionally drives up standards world wide. This is an important area where the Parliament can have a substantive impact on energy use, particularly using its legislative powers.

    • Redirecting public finances in Europe – At present there remain substantive subsidies in Europe (to the fossil fuel industry) and the EU budget does not adequately take account of climate issues. The Parliament could make it a priority to redress the balance in order to deliver more effective climate action, more use of clean technologies and optimise the opportunities offered by the transition to a low carbon economy.

What can MEPs do, now and at the negotiations, to help promote an ambitious deal?

In many ways the Parliament’s ability to determine the EU negotiating mandate for Copenhagen is now limited. However, MEPs have an important role in securing a strong and credible platform for the negotiations, ensuring that Member States and the international community are aware that a weak deal would be unacceptable.

    • MEPs could give the message that:

        − The European Parliament has not ‘changed its mind on climate’ – Following the elections the Parliament must send a clear message to Member States and the international community that climate remains a primary priority. Any Parliamentary resolution on Copenhagen should reflect the continued ambition of the Parliament to lead on this issue.
        − Active engagement in the comitology discussions and development of follow up measures to the package of climate and energy legislation adopted in 2008 ‐ It is important to demonstrate that ‘the Parliament does not simply legislate and move on’ but is concerned with the detail of legislation, which is often crucial for success.
        − The Parliament as a leader – Historically the Parliament has been fundamental to driving political aspirations in Europe, for example, it was MEPs that first called for a 30% reduction target (based on the scientific evidence at that time). It may take time to permeate policy but the opinions adopted in the Parliament are influential.
        − Making use of the power offered to the Parliament as a budgetary authority – The Parliament should, as soon as, possible adopt initial proposals for the future of the EU budget reflecting the importance of climate. This would send a strong signal of commitment to the issue.

    • Upcoming opportunities – Prior to Copenhagen:

        − Making use of the Commissioner hearings – this offers an opportunity to send a message to the international community about the importance of climate issues to the new Parliament.
        − Perhaps moving the decision on carbon leakage rules under the EU ETS until after Copenhagen – there is a danger that a carbon leakage deal could send a protectionist message to the international community, additionally the scale of action needed may alter in wake of Copenhagen.

    • Opportunities for MEPs at Copenhagen:

        − Engage with National Parliamentarians – Understanding the detailed positions of third countries and engaging strategically with national parliamentarians from different delegations
        − Engaging with key NGOs – Meeting with NGOs to understand their activities and primary concerns as the negotiations evolve
        − Informing the EU’s negotiators – Helping to inform negotiators of the concerns, positions of and areas of debate among the different delegations and NGO community
        − Operating as a coordinated Parliamentary team in Copenhagen and making use of the EEA’s hospitality – During COP15 the EEA has offered MEPs the opportunity to make use of their office facilities and expertise based in Copenhagen, please contact Johannes Schilling ( This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it ) for details and to reserve space.

 

Summary of the debate, speech by EEA Executive Director Jacqueline McGlade, OXFAM briefing paper Beyond Aid.