Environment at risk

“What it not done today, will have a higher cost in the future”. The representative of the Presidency-in-Office, Jean-Louis Borloo, reiterated once again the European Union’s environmental responsibilities. The address of the French speaker was part of an ongoing debate on the “energy package” between the three Community institutions, held at the Euro-Parliament on December 3-4 in Brussels.Climate and energy. The same package of measures on climate changes and energy sources will be addressed by the European Council on December 11 and 12. Along with this “thorny” issue, the Council will discuss joint measures regarding the economic crisis, with references also to the procedures of the Lisbon Treaty. The Assembly was called to face also other issues that include the export of chemical weapons to Third Countries, the implementation of the directive on chemicals and the planning of a European strategy for the Roma population. As relates to the debate on climate and energy, Borloo stressed that “this month, the world’s attention is focused on Europe”, on the expected provisions on the environment, in compliance with the commitments recently taken by the EU: to decrease CO2 emissions by 20% by the year 2020, to step up energy efficiency by 20% and resort to 20% of renewable resources. For Borloo the 27 are “at a crossroads”, although “a series of crucial points still need to be faced”, “including solidarity and the progress in the achievement of the 20/20/20 objective, hindered by disagreements between the Member States” and “by the need to increase energy market efficiency without burdening consumer and enterprise spending”. Is the agreement close? The minister recalled a series of specific “stalemates”. He mentioned the case of the Baltic Countries, which “according to the Treaty ought to dismantle their nuclear plants”, while “Poland and the other States, are marked by decreased energy-efficiency and by economies with a high carbon emission. Thus an agreement on the agenda’s progress is needed in order to meet the common objectives. During the debate, Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs, affirmed, “the three institutions will soon come to an agreement over the climate-change package, since disagreements only regard the last minor points”. “An agreement over the directive for renewable energies would make the difference – he added – especially as relates to energy purveyance in Europe”. Stavros Dimas, Commissioner with responsibility for the Environment, declared that “climate changes and the energy package are among the most significant endeavours undertaken by the Union in recent years”. In his opinion, “a low-carbon economy would trigger European competitiveness and encourage innovation”. Dimas said he feels “optimistic” that an agreement between the 27 States will be reached despite a series of points still in need of definition and in spite of the obstacles raised by the governments. During the policy debate, all political groups intervened expressing their unanimous endorsement of the summit, that will be followed by Parliament vote in Strasbourg on December 17. A number of MEPs did however object that the package is insufficient to address the serious challenges that ought to be met.Aids to the Developing Countries. Last week’s Parliament sitting was primarily devoted to discussion sessions on the current major political and economic issues. MEPs held an intense debate on economic-crisis containment measures while the address of the Dalai Lama was amply echoed. Among the concrete decisions reached by MEPs figures a regulation allocating 1 billion euro for the period 2008-2010 to “provide assistance to a number of developing countries due to the boost in foodstuff prices. The funds will be employed to promote production by resorting to micro-credits, investments, equipment and infrastructures, and to meet food requirements”. Recipient Countries will provide instructions after a consultation phase with the other international bodies, starting from the UN. Envisaged measures include: the promotion of production factors and agricultural services, that include fertilizers and seeds; the preservation and/or improvement of agricultural yield with a view to “meeting the food needs of weaker population brackets, including children”; along with interventions like “investment credits, equipment, infrastructures and storage facilities, and vocational training”.