Press conference - Environment Council
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
Offset
Transcript offset
Export
Replay
Versions of this video
Transcripts may differ slightly from one version to another.
Council of the European Union European Council
Follow its sittingsWopke Hoekstra
Thank you and many thanks to the Irish presidency in general and the two ministers in particular for today, which was I think clearly a testimony to our commitment in terms of climate action and in terms of the environment. Many things of course have been discussed today, but let me focus on two main things that were very prominently on the agenda in the domain of climate action. First of course, an extensive and very good conversation on the ETS review, where in my view there is very significant support for the overall architecture, for the logic of bringing reciprocity to the system, and for making sure that we turn the ETS truly into an investment engine, and that the whole name of the game here needs to be to bring climate competitiveness and independence ever more hand in hand.
That was the first big discussion. The second one was of course on COP 31, where again thanks to the presidency, I'm convinced we reached very helpful conclusions that will shape our road forward towards COP 31. With at the heart of that our continued ambition in the domain of mitigation and particularly focusing on electrification, clean electrification, which will also be the name of the game at the COP. My experience of last week at the pre-COP is that that is a theme that is also going to be pushed very much by the chair or the chairs or the presidencies I should probably say and by many of the constituents, which I think is a very good, very good thing. So very glad that we had that at the heart of the conversation today as well.
Secondly, and that is important to continue to convey, in our view this really needs to be a COP that is about implementation. We pretty much know what to do in the domain of climate. It is not that we need many more highbrow meetings. What we do need is to deliver on the stuff we know that is that needs to be done and in many cases that we have already committed to. So an implementation COP that should focus on clean electrification where we are ready to also have a conversation on making sure that the finance that was committed lands at the right places.
But where the focus really should be on this and let me close off with that, where science continues to underpin whatever we do in this domain. Let me pause there and thank you and thank the two of you very much for today.
Speaker 1
Thank you, Commissioner. We'll now open the floor to questions. We have colleagues here in the room and a number of colleagues joining online as well. I'll start here in the room and if I could ask you just to introduce yourself and your media outlet, please. First I have Ian.
Ian Johnson
Thank you very much to you all. Ian Johnson from the Financial Times. On a number of questions, there was a rejection in the room from some member states of the conditionalities aspect of the ETS proposal. Does that undermine the proposal which was based on giving more leeway to emit in condition for conditions on investment? And this morning, another NV file, the French president has said that a deal is imminent on EU car policy from France and Germany, calling for a more pragmatic approach on decarbonization.
Speaker 4
Will this damage Europe's climate goals and require more ambition in other areas such as the ETS?
Darragh O'Brien
Thank you very much, Ian. Just firstly, look, those who watched in on the debate on on the ETS 1 review, you'll see that the tone I believe was very good. There is really amongst ministers and member states a desire to to get a good compromise agreement that works for everyone. So, you know, with regard to your specific question around conditions and conditionality, obviously there's different views within the room. But what's very important is there's momentum building around it.
As I said already, we've been able to close off two files within it on the market stability reserve and benchmark and shows what actually can be done. And all of us are in agreement that industry needs certainty. And ETS 1 review, we're still, you know, we're ambitious for it. The Commission are as well.
And we stand ready to bring this back to Council in December for a general approach and an agreement on that. And that's not without its challenges, but I certainly believe that with everyone working together and pushing in the same direction, which I think today by any fair observation and estimation people will actually, or assessment should I say, will actually see that there was very much that desire to do that. So I think in relation to CO2 for cars and vans, you know, that's something I've read with interest the reports on it. Obviously that is something else that the presidency stands ready for that to come to Council in December. And we've had some meetings around that around the fringes today as well.
And again, that's important for the car sector. But Europe is ambitious on climate. Europe has led in relation to climate action. We know we need to do more, but ETS1 review will assist with that. It's one of the most significant tools in our toolbox in relation to decarbonization and electrification.
Wopke Hoekstra
Thanks, Ian. I would say on your first question, that conditionality was actually something that was broadly supported. And if anything, there was a debate on how to do that most effectively. But it is crystal clear that all countries, as the minister just said, want predictability. And all or almost all have also argued for the need to have more investments on European soil.
And that leads you almost automatically to the conclusion that then you need to have an engine that provides you with that. And conditionality could do that. And then of course you can have a conversation and Member States have different views on how to do that most effectively. But that is the way I have appreciated that conversation. On EU cars, well, it is hard to comment on something that you haven't seen.
So I continue to advocate the logic and the appeal of the proposal that we have put on the table, which will require not just two Member States, but of course ideally all 27, but in any case a two-third majority plus a regular majority in the European Parliament.
Nicolas Camut
Thank you so much. Nicolas Camut for Politico. Commissioner Hoekstra, last year you were here, you sent a letter to ministers promising them to ease the ETS2, then you strengthened the price break, and then later you delayed it by a year. Now ministers are asking for even more concessions on ETS2. Are you prepared to offer those as part of a deal on the ETS1?
And Minister O'Brien, today several ministers demanded the post-2030 framework to make a decision on the ETS1. My understanding is that will land in early December, around then, and you hope to have a deal by mid-December. How do you expect to square that circle? Thank you.
Wopke Hoekstra
Thank you. And maybe first on the exact timeline and the exact order of events and the events as they took place. The first thing we have done as a Commission is to ensure an easier phase-in and come up with instruments that make sure that investments are being made. That has been part of the proposal the Commission came up with last year. That is one.
Then secondly, as part of the compromise we had on the 90% legislation, part of that compromise was indeed that we have postponed ETS2 by one year. But that was part of that compromise. That was not something that the Commission in itself would have otherwise embarked on. And there are also no plans on the side of the Commission to change anything in the approach towards ETS2, neither in its design nor in its implementation path.
Darragh O'Brien
Just very quickly, Nico, I think again you would have watched in on the debate there today. I think it's important to state as well, this is the first time that ministers in a formal way at Environment Council actually got to put forward the views of member states. Sight around the post-2030 is something that many have looked for and asked for, and that will be, as you've said, December. I do think it's possible to square that circle. There are elements, there are sizeable portions within ETS1, I think that there is, you know, a near common approach on and that we can move, that we can move forward on.
So we can, I think it can be done. Our leaders have charged us with doing that and with getting this back to Council in December, and that, as I said earlier on, is our plan. People to have clarity post-2030 is something that I know that the Commission will meet with member states and continually meets with member states in that regard as well to elicit the views of different member states too, as I have done in the past as well, and the Commission are very open to that. So no one's been kept in the dark in that regard. So I still think that certainty that industry, that Europe needs around ETS1 is absolute priority, and that's what we're working towards.
John Ainger
John Ainger, Bloomberg News. A question, a follow-up on the ETS2, but this time to Minister O'Brien. Do you see ETS2 as a legitimate part of the debate in this overhaul of ETS1? Is that something that you see as being on the negotiating table? To Commissioner Hoekstra, another thing we heard from a number of countries today was to find a WTO-compliant solution for exports.
Is the Commission any closer to finding that on a longer-term basis than what we had put on the table earlier in the year? And then just secondly on COP, what can the EU achieve in terms of mitigation at COP31? Thanks.
Darragh O'Brien
Thanks, John. I think, look, my job holding the presidency is to facilitate debate, not to shut it down, and we're not doing that. Some will have a view around ETS2, but I think the real priority, as I said, is gaining agreement on ETS1. So my own personal views are not relevant in that regard. Our job as presidency is to facilitate debate, but also then to work towards a workable compromise, which I believe we can do.
In relation to COP31, and I've had experience of the previous COP as well, I think that we are much better prepared now. We've, you know, there were learnings from COP, not from within the EU necessarily, some of it within that as well, that we have a much more focused strategic approach, a slimmed down, excuse me, set of objectives there too. And as Wopke has already said, is that we're all clear that this is an implementation COP and to move forward on a lot of unity around our approach on COP. I think the joint communication strategy that's been agreed as well, the conclusions that have been agreed today as well, well in advance of COP, and we'll have significant ministerial involvement in those negotiations too, where we've agreed a way forward with regard to ministerial outreach amongst countries to assist the European Commission, the European Union with regard to reaching out to our partners right the way across the world. So I think we're in, notwithstanding the fact we're not naive about the COP will be a difficult negotiation, but I think the European Union is at one in our approach to COP31.
Wopke Hoekstra
So first on CBAM and ETS and any proposals, we will continue to do what is necessary to level the playing field and avoid carbon leaking from the European Union.
We have come up with a range of proposals already, but we will openly look into any new proposals, certainly also the one tabled by France, because we feel there is merit in really getting this right. At the same time, we feel that everyone would agree that of course whatever measurement you will put on the table will need to meet a certain legal bar. So that is just one of the boundary conditions you always have. But the attitude will be one of openness and looking what can be done rather than to exclude options. Secondly, on the COP, you're asking, okay, but how do you then move on in the domain of mitigation?
And I would argue that electrification is probably one of the most effective things you can do. We always say here in Europe that we need more grid capacity, we need more solar, we need more wind, we need more nuclear, we need more battery capacity, and specifically for the Union, we need more interconnectors. That last thing might be less relevant for some other geographies, but I would argue that that full mix is something that is applicable across the globe. So seeking to move the needle in this whole domain would be a very good thing for the world at large. So that is our objective going there.
Maybe just one last thing on ETS2, just from my perspective and my pattern recognition, not on the process, but what I'm getting back from member states. Of course it is true that there is a group of countries that still continue to raise concerns about ETS2. There is also a significantly larger group of member states, more than two-thirds, that have initially said yes to the proposal and that continue to stand by it. And they might be less vocal, but they have also made it clear to us that they do want to make sure that the implementation stays on course.
Nadège Delepine
Good afternoon, Nadège Delepine for Agence Europe. One question for Commissioner Hoekstra. As you're just back from the pre-COP, could you tell us if there seems to be broad support for the transition away from fossil fuels, as the Council wants to push for this issue to gain support at COP31? And also a question on COP31 for ministers. In the Council conclusions, the mention of international credits has been removed compared to the draft versions.
So does that mean that international credits are not yet mature enough to be efficient tools for financing climate action? Thank you.
Wopke Hoekstra
So what is the history of transitioning away? This was a major milestone at COP28 in Dubai when we agreed to transition away from fossil fuels, to triple electrification, and to double energy efficiency. But unfortunately, we've also experienced at the last COP that there was a small but vocal group of naysayers, particularly on that, which has then inspired a group of countries to do something from a plurilateral perspective in the domain of transitioning away. There is initially led by Colombia and the Netherlands. Tuvalu is going to do that now together with Ireland in the next calendar year.
And I think there is significant merit in doing that because that allows the frontrunners to do more in that domain.
What I like about the current or the upcoming COP is the unifying theme of electrification, which to some degree might be different wording for the same thing, but at the same time it is also much broader. And it dials open a broader part of the solution space, again for the reasons I just mentioned, because some might like the idea of more solar, others will jump on wind, again others will move fully into battery capacity or into nuclear. So having that as a scope with a bit of pragmatism, but a theme that has the potential to unify the family and deliver, I think is a smart bet from the presidency.
Darragh O'Brien
Just very quickly, just the point in relation to transition away from fossil, just want to touch on because as Wopke's mentioned that Ireland will be co-hosting the second TAF next year with Tuvalu. That was discussed at pre-COP at Fiji, but there are over 80 countries following Belém who've committed to this. And I think the good thing about the TAF is that it's a non-negotiation space and it's open to more to join that, and that's what we want to do and to keep transition away from fossil on the agenda and firmly on the agenda. And that actually is obviously completely complementary with our electrification agenda. But us partnering with Tuvalu as well, following on from the really good work that's been done by Colombia and the Netherlands on this, means that we're building momentum in that space.
And I would say to be fair to the Brazilian presidency of COP30 as well, who's included in the roadmap that had been published as well. So that in itself is something that really guides us and is obvious. And we see here within Europe, not just from a climate perspective, but the risks to Europe here because of our overdependence on fossil, and it's an imperative that we do everything that we can to accelerate the reduction in that dependence and towards electrification. In relation to the conclusions on COP31, a lot of work had gone into them to get them agreed at an early stage. They're much more focused, they're very clear and defined, and that is going to be our approach to COP.
It doesn't leave other elements out as such to discuss, but we want to have a very, I believe we do, a very well thought out set of conclusions, a very well thought out also communications plan and strategy that we can go out to really work very hard on this implementation COP and to make a serious advancement on COP30.
Speaker 1
Thank you, Minister. We'll take a question online here. I have Davide, if you could turn on your camera please and introduce yourself.
Davide Basso
Yeah, hi, Davide Basso from Argus Media. It's a question on aviation, the extension of aviation. I was just wondering for the Minister and the Commissioner if you saw there was support for that. Do you feel you have the backing of EU states on that?
Wopke Hoekstra
Well, let me reiterate what we said at the beginning. The overall architecture, including the element where we are broadening the scope, I would say in a very pragmatic way adjusting things over time, that approach and that logic has, in my view, significant support in the room. At this stage it is probably not helpful to highlight any specificities because then, you know, if we suggest that a specific item has a very strong majority or certainly a majority, that might not do justice to the room because we had all ministers speaking for roughly three minutes.
But my overall sense is that the whole package, including the additions, aviation, maritime, negative emissions, waste incineration, that that as a logic has significant appeal to the group at large.
Darragh O'Brien
Just to add very quickly to what Wopke said, if you take the maritime sector in particular, we got an opportunity today to hear from not just island states, but you know, around their views. And it was obviously a relatively short contribution that member states made, but it gives us an opportunity now to work on that at working group level and at an official level to try to understand more and in more detail the views that are coming forward on both aviation and on maritime.
Speaker 11
Hello, Adrian Cano, 5SP. Just a question about Cap2No, which you support or not the Turkish...
Speaker 1
I'm sorry, Adrian, we won't be able to take that question, I'm afraid. We'll follow up with you bilaterally. Thank you everyone for joining us this afternoon. See you in December.