Since Europe cannot have laws, under what form will this climate law be?
“It will be a regulation but that is not very restrictive.”
What does this climate law really asks for?
“Within this regulation, they propose to have a revision of the different directives on climate objectives from September and from 2029-2030 to go through delegated acts.”
Is this climate law really necessary?
“It is important that there is legislation that allows to cover everything, so as not to forget sectors. Please note that this is not what is offered. We would have needed a law which affirmed the main principles and a way to work our way there. But the climate law proposed by the Commission is not strong enough.”
Is this law really helping us?
“At least they are giving a priority to the ecology. The problem is when you actually look at what it concretely means its weaker. I prefer a commission that says they will engrave in marbre a carbon neutrality for 2050. Another positif point is that they mentioned is that after 2050 we need to have negative emotions. It’s good because it was taboo until today.”
What would you have added to this law?
1. I would revise all directives, to raise the objectives. We should have a 65% reduction for 2030 and neutrality in 2040.
2. We need to add sectors, for example, the emissions of agriculture are not treated enough. (In France, 30% of emissions that are not considered by public politics). We are not talking about private sectors, about importation. The law is not talking about a social aspect.
3. The Commission does not accept to acknowledge the fact that climate change violates human rights and we need to apply a right to a stable climate.
4. The budget is also completely missing in this law.
“I believe we need a kind of climate council that could analyse, insuring the transparency. Since the goal is for the climate law to be revised at the level of science, they have proposed delegated acts, so the Commission proposes to the Parliament and the Council to adjust the law, at any time. Which sounds nice, but practically I believe countries will play with this in their own favour. (…) To have a regulation that is not flexible, that would be taken by the court to make sure it is applied is important.
5. We don’t really have any ways for these goals to be implemented and applied. The law is clearly not enough.”