During the hearings of Commissioner-designates which took place at the European Parliament last week, parliamentarians repeatedly pointed out that sustainability needs to be part of an integrated approach at the European level. Controversially, at the “Barroso II” Commission, environmental protection and the fight against climate change will be under the responsibility of different European Commissioners. Addressing the concerns voiced by many MEPs and civil society organisations, Connie Hedegaard, the Danish Commissioner-designate for climate action, emphasised “We must mainstream climate into all relevant policy areas.” Here follows a cross-sectoral overview of the commitment to sustainable development and environmental protection as presented by relevant Commissioner-designates for their terms in office. Reactions from civil society organizations on the candidates’ performances should be published by the end of the week.

On Wednesday, January 13, Janez Potočnik (former European Commissioner for Science and Research and Environment Commissioner-designate), was quizzed by the Environment Committee on his priorities for his potential mandate. During an assured performance, he said he was in favour of a holistic, cross-sectoral approach to the environment inside the Commission, since many issues overlap. He also promised to put resource efficiency, biodiversity and the enforcement of existing EU environmental legislation as top-priority issues during his mandate.

The nominee has been questioned on his program regarding various issues such as resource efficiency, chemicals (REACH legislation), major challenges in terms of biodiversity , water management in the EU, forest protection and the Soil Directive. However, he surprisingly left out biofuels and genetically modified organisms (GMOs), two contentious environment-linked policies.
Answering Linda McAvan’s question (S&D, UK), the Slovenian Commissioner-designate said he wanted the environment to be “higher in the political agenda”, and to ensure “the economy goes hand in hand with the environment”. Replying to those wanting to put jobs first, he stressed that “by investing in environment we are putting the jobs first”. Asked by Chris Davies (ALDE, UK) and several other MEPs how he would enforce implementation of environmental legislation by Member States, he answered that “what has been adopted, needs to be fully implemented”. Satu Hassi (Greens/EFA, FI) asked him whether he would advocate clear targets on resource efficiency. Janez Potočnik answered that “the concept of resource efficiency will be central to (his) approach” but “whenever we discuss setting targets we need a careful approach”. Mr Potočnik agreed with Gerben-Jan Gebrandy (ALDE, NL) that the 2010 target on biodiversity is a failure and promised to present at the end of 2010 a new biodiversity action plan. Within this plan, economic aspects should be taken into account. His focus will also be on the full implementation of the Natura 2000 legislation, he added. Asked by Carl Schlyter (Greens/EFA, SV) on the implementation of the REACH chemicals legislation, he said that the implementation would mean re-negotiation. He had plans the chemicals agency in Helsinki together with Antonio Tajani, Commissioner-designate for industry and entrepreneurship, to give a clear sign that “we want to implement what has been agreed”. About the soil directive, he answered Vittorio Prodi’s question (ALDE, IT) that he “would not like to see subsidiarity as an excuse for inaction” and that the soil directive would be an issue of EU interest. For what concerns water management, his priority will be the implementation of the existing legislation with a more integrated approach. “The question should be dealt with together with colleagues of other Commission departments”, he said.

In five years from now, “I would like to see a Europe that is the most climate-friendly region in the world” said climate change Commissioner-designate Connie Hedegaard at her three-hour hearing on Friday 15 January .
She said she 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), Mrs. 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) and Dan Jørgensen (S&D, DK). She also stressed that the EU should continue to push other countries to set more ambitious targets. Asked by Marita Ulvskog, (S&D, SE) and 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.
On the issue of carbon leakage, Connie Hedegaard showed she was really concerned by this threat, but also stressed that “we should take care that we are not so cautious and so balanced that we do not benefit our countries”. She clearly expressed her disagreement regarding potential punitive trade measures, describing border taxes as “the lowest denominator” and underlining the risk they would represent for an international agreement. Ms. Hedegaard stressed the need for the European emission trading system (ETS) to fit well with a coming American system. 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.
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.
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 finally 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”. “Climate, energy security and job creation must be the EU's vision”, she stressed.

Günter Oettinger has been questioned by several MEPs on his views regarding the share of nuclear and renewable energies in the EU's energy supply. Alejo Vidal-Quadras (EPP, ES) asked whether Mr Oettinger was prepared to set “an integrated target for all low-emission forms of energy” (including nuclear energy), since the target of 20 per cent renewable energy by 2020 was not enough to cut emissions.  In the long term, said the Commissioner-designate, a figure of over 20 per cent for renewable energy would be needed. He added that in the coming years we must start to talk about the decade after the present one. He also believed that the Desertec wind and solar energy project in north Africa must not become an “exploitation of Africa” but “the start of a new partnership, a win-win situation”.
As for nuclear energy, he had “respect for national decision-making powers”. “There are countries that see nuclear power as a long-term option, not just a stopgap technology. I have to accept that”, he said. However, “I see myself as a moderator, not an ambassador for nuclear power”, was Mr Oettinger's reply to a question by Anni Podimata (S&D, GR). The EU's role, he believed, lay in the areas of nuclear safety, atomic energy research and the disposal of radioactive waste.
To questions by Lena Ek (ALDE, SE), Vladimir Urutchev (EPP, BG) and Jorgo Chatzimarkakis (ALDE, DE) on achieving the energy efficiency target of 20% by 2020, Mr Oettinger replied that “guidelines that give long-term planning security are not a disadvantage for industry but an advantage in future markets” and that he was prepared “to intervene strongly” in the areas of electricity generation, industrial production and buildings.

Maire Geoghegan-Quinn, the Irish Commissioner-designate for Research and Innovation, indicated that addressing major challenges such as climate change and energy efficiency was among the priorities she proposed for her term of office. When it came to nuclear energy, Ms. Geoghegan-Quinn stressed that “nuclear energy is no silver bullet that is going to resolve the climate change and energy problem”, “but (it) remains the technology of choice in many Member States” and “research should be maintained and developed as an option for those Member States that wish to pursue it”. She added that ITER [the EU's nuclear fusion project] “is a vital element of a long-term strategy that the Union has for sustainable energy supply and security (...). We have to ensure that this project is working”.

Answering to MEPs underlining the major challenges in the transport sector regarding CO2 emission reductions, Siim Kallas (Commissioner-designate for Transport) stressed that “decarbonisation is not debatable”. “We have binding targets for the reduction of emissions by 2020 and we will make the necessary legislative proposals”, he added.
On the “internalisation of external costs” linked to transport pollution, Mr Kallas said that the EU's Climate Change Agenda “makes it imperative to make progress” towards applying the “adequate pricing mechanisms” in all modes of transport.
Mr Kallas also made clear his concern for business interests and stressed the need to strike the right balance between green regulation and profitability. “We must be careful not to have a compromise that leaves everyone unsatisfied”, he said.
Questioned by Michael Cramer (Greens, DE) and Christine De Veyrac (EPP, FR) on how to ensure the aviation industry bears some of the cost of climate change, Mr Kallas agreed that the EU should push further for the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) to be applied to the sector. However, when asked if he would use the ETS revenue to fund the EU's green common policies, he observed that this would be impossible, as ETS revenue goes to Member States, not the EU. He did however indicate that he would be ready to negotiate on the question.

On Thursday 14, Neelie Kroes (Commissioner-designate for the Digital Agenda) said, in an answer to Philippe Lamberts (Greens/EFA, BE), that she will do her best with the colleagues in the Commission to accelerate the positive impact of ICT on everyday life in areas like health, culture, trade, economy and energy. ICT will definitely have a role to play to accelerate the change towards a low-carbon economy.

“Green industry is one of the best promises for the future”, declared Janusz Lewandowski (Commissioner-designate for Budgets) during his nomination hearing on Monday 11th, citing the need to fund the development of new technologies and the example of Poland's efforts to meet EU standards despite being heavily dependent on coal. “We need a key orientation for the coming financial perspectives. Maybe it could be the environment or climate change”, he suggested.

On the energy issue, Baroness Catherine Ashton (High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy) advocated a “diversification of sources of supply” as well as a strategy to avoid relying on energy coming solely from Russia.

Commenting on the risk that Official Development Assistance might be redirected to fund climate change related aid, Andris Piebalgs (Commissioner-designate for Development) stressed the need to deliver on aid pledges for 2010-2011. He also underlined that even though climate change and poverty eradication are linked, they should be funded separately. In this context, the Commissioner-designate said that he was open to the possibility of  introducing a Tobin tax.

Olli Rehn (Commissioner-designate for Economic and Monetary Affairs) pointed out that the state must be there to facilitate innovation, investment in education and the take-up of green technologies, all key elements in the EU 2020 strategy.

In his response to Yannick Jadot (Greens/EFA, FR), Karel de Gucht (Commissioner-designate for Trade) said he did not agree with the introduction of a carbon emission-related EU “border adjustment tax”, which, as he put it, would run the risk of sliding into a trade war. On energy security, he underlined the need for dispute settlement provisions to be included in free trade agreements with Russia and Ukraine. He added that he would also focus on dismantling non-tariff trade barriers.

Replying to Eija-Riitta Korhola (EPP, FI) who asked him if  he would propose a carbon tax to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, Algirdas Šemeta (Commissioner-designate for Taxation and customs union, audit and anti-fraud) assured that “the energy taxation directive is one of (his) first priorities”. He promised to encourage innovation to strengthen energy efficiency and environmental protection.