Details

Personally happy because I like to work on environment and health, but workload for staff must be reduced / The Commission should not repeat the pace and the amount of proposals on environment / Whoever becomes Chair of ENVI Committee should put more emphasis on health


“Personally, I am very happy about this decision, because I like to work on environment and health and feel obliged to deliver on my promises from the campaign, which would have been a bit more complicated with two separate committees. On the other hand, I think something has to change compared to the last parliament. At least 25% of all co-decision files landed in ENVI. This is challenging, in particular for the staff. That is why we need fewer proposals from the European Commission. This is necessary anyhow, because citizens, particularly those working in industry and agriculture, are overwhelmed by too many proposals. We also need a Chair of ENVI who puts enough priority on health and does not only look at environmental issues. A split could have been a good solution, but if the two above-mentioned conditions are met, I am also happy”, said the health policy spokesperson of the largest party in the European Parliament (EPP Christian Democrats), Peter Liese.


Details

Peter Liese: But we need more deal, less bureaucracy and more openness to technology

“As Christian Democrats in the European Parliament, we continue to support the core of the Green Deal. In particular, the climate targets for 2030 and the goal of climate neutrality for 2050 are not up for discussion. But we need more ‘deal' in the Green Deal. The interests of the economy, especially industry, agriculture and SMEs, must be better taken into account. The Green Deal must be implemented with less bureaucracy and more technological openness," emphasized Liese, environmental policy spokesperson for the largest political group in the European Parliament (EPP, Christian Democrats). An important symbol of this is technological openness in the decarbonization of cars, Liese continues: "The existing legislation requires that new cars must no longer emit CO2 from their exhaust pipes from 2035. This de facto excludes the combustion engine, even if it runs on completely climate-neutral fuels. We want to change this. A delegated act, which the German Transport Minister Wissing has forced through, is not enough; the basic legal act must be amended accordingly."

Details

Peter Liese: Commitment to emissions trading as its most important basis / European Commission to take the lead in negotiating international environmental agreements in future / Target of only allowing climate-neutral cars from 2035 remains, but should be technology-neutral, i.e. can also be achieved with e-fuels, f.ex. / Include negative emissions in emissions trading / More financial support for citizens and companies in the transformation process

The largest political group in the European Parliament (EPP, Christian Democrats) wants to develop the European Union's Green Deal into a Green Growth Deal. This is a key decision taken by the group at a closed meeting in preparation for the new legislative period. The group is committed to the European Union's climate targets for 2030 and the climate neutrality target for 2050, but wants to achieve these targets with less bureaucracy and greater dialogue with all stakeholders. Openness to technology is also important to the group. After intensive discussions, it was made clear in the paper that the goal of only allowing climate-neutral cars to be registered as of 2035 should remain, but that the existing ban on the combustion engine should be replaced by a technology-neutral approach, so that climate-neutral fuels such as e-fuels should also be permitted and new cars that only run on these fuels can also be registered after 2035.

Details

Peter Liese: Goal correct, but implementation far too bureaucratic / Letter from Biden administration shows urgency

“The European Commission absolutely must postpone the entry into force of the deforestation regulation and then use the transitional period to reduce bureaucracy in the text," demanded Dr. Peter Liese, environmental spokesperson for the largest political group in the European Parliament (EPP, Christian Democrats). The aim of the regulation is to be fully supported, the MEP continued: "We must do something about deforestation worldwide and take our responsibility seriously. It is unacceptable for areas the size of eleven soccer pitches to fall victim to deforestation per minute. However, the regulation has been turned into a bureaucratic monster by a majority of Greens, Social Democrats, Leftists and French Liberals. Many small farmers around the world and even small forest owners in the European Union cannot work with the text. Even the preparatory work that the Commission should have carried out has not been done. In addition, third countries are complaining massively about the legislation, including countries that are pursuing the same goal as we are, namely to stop deforestation. Most recently, in a letter dated May 30, the Biden Administration from the U.S. urged the Commission to postpone the entry into force.”

  1. Peter Liese on Future EU Climate and Environmental Policy
  2. Commission Communication on the Health Union
  3. Ursula von der Leyen suggests exemptions from PFAS ban in letter to EPP MEPs in the European Parliament
  4. The problem is not the ETS price, but the decline in industrial production