Resolution on the communication from the Commission on a common platform: Guidelines for European Union preparation for the United Nations General Assembly Special Session to be held in New York in June 1997 to review Agenda 21 and related outcomes of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992 (COM(96)0569 C4-0656/96)
Date: 1997-03-14
Institutions: Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety, European Parliament
Subjects: UN Conference, UNO, economic development, environmental policy, environmental protection













EUR-Lex - 51997IP0083 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51997IP0083

Resolution on the communication from the Commission on a common platform: Guidelines for European Union preparation for the United Nations General Assembly Special Session to be held in New York in June 1997 to review Agenda 21 and related outcomes of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992 (COM(96)0569 C4-0656/96)  


Official Journal C 115 , 14/04/1997 P. 0228 





A4-0083/97Resolution on the communication from the Commission on a common platform: Guidelines for European Union preparation for the United Nations General Assembly Special Session to be held in New York in June 1997 to review Agenda 21 and related outcomes of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992 (COM(96)0569 - C4-0656/96)The European Parliament,- having regard to the communication from the Commission on a common platform: Guidelines for European Union preparation for the United Nations General Assembly Special Session to be held in New York in June 1997 to review Agenda 21 and related outcomes of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992 (COM(96)0569 - C4-0656/96),- having regard to the Council's conclusions at its meeting of 9 December 1996 concerning the guidelines for the EU's preparation for the United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS),- having regard to the Brundtland Report of 1987 on the environment and development ((World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future, Oxford University Press, 1987.)),- having regard to the conclusions of the UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992 (UNCED),- having regard to the Irish Presidency's draft revision of the EU Treaty in preparation for the European Council meeting in Dublin in December 1996 (Dublin II),- having regard to the WTO Summit in Singapore in December 1996,- having regard to the UN Population Conference in Cairo in September 1994,- having regard to the UN Social Summit in Copenhagen in March 1995,- having regard to the FAO Food Summit in November 1996,- having regard to the EU's Fifth Action Programme on the Environment ((OJ C 138, 17.5.1993, p. 1.)) and the ongoing review of that programme ((OJ C 140, 11.5.1996, p. 5.)),- having regard to its resolutions of 13 February 1992 on EC participation in the United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development (UNCED) and on the need for a convention on the protection of forests ((OJ C 67, 16.3.1992, pp. 152 and 156.)),- having regard to its resolutions of 18 January 1994 on the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) and on monitoring by the European Community of the implementation of Agenda 21 of the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) ((OJ C 44, 14.2.1994, pp. 44 and 46.)),- having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection and the opinion of the Committee on Development and Cooperation (A4-0083/97),A. whereas the Rio Conference yielded positive results (the Climate Change Convention, the Biodiversity Convention, Agenda 21 and the raising of environmental awareness) but, at the same time, we are today even further away from sustainable development than in 1992 and there is still no Forest Convention,B. whereas the general deterioration in the world environment makes it essential to review the Rio conclusions and the results of the follow-up process in order to carry out the necessary adjustments,C. whereas it is essential for both successes and continuing problems to be covered by this review of Agenda 21 and other decisions of the Rio Conference,D. whereas the concept of sustainable development underlines the reciprocity between economic and social development and protection of the world environment,E. whereas the Commission communication provides a sound basis for discussing the nature of the Community's common negotiating position in New York in June 1997 but, at the same time, emphasizing the importance of the continuing preparations in the run-up to the conference being as comprehensive as possible and leading to a more ambitious climate for the conference's conclusions,F. whereas it is essential that the EU should go on the offensive and take a very active part in the international preparatory work for the conference in June 1997 - in particular, the official preparatory meetings arranged by the UN in New York with the working party from 24 February to 7 March and the fifth session of the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) from 7 to 25 April,G. whereas the EU's efforts to promote sustainable development worldwide suffer a serious loss of credibility as a result of its own failure to comply with the objective of sustainable development,H. whereas it is of the greatest importance that the objective of sustainable development should be enshrined in the Treaty and that the fifth action programme on the environment, whose objectives coincide with the Rio conclusions, should be tightened up and implemented as swiftly as possible; in so doing, local action-orientated Agenda 21 plans must be better integrated into all Community policies and be actively supported,1. Considers the main objective of the forthcoming conference to be an improved partnership between rich and poor countries;2. Considers the biggest problem to be the lack of commitment by the rich countries, which is reflected partly in their excessive level of consumption (causing the bulk of world pollution) and partly in their failure to honour their pledge at Rio in 1992 to transfer additional resources to the developing countries;3. Shares the Council's concern that most Member States are not honouring the budgetary commitments of Rio but considers the Council statement that these pledges must be honoured as rapidly as possible to be inadequate;4. Emphasizes that the EU, despite the failure to transfer resources, is the only region capable of being a driving force in the continuing development of international environmental cooperation and must therefore assume a leading role in championing the global environment;5. Emphasizes that international trade that takes into account both environmental and development aspects is a precondition for sustainable development and deeply regrets the failure to make any headway in this direction at the WTO meeting in Singapore in December 1996;6. Believes that the single most important specific contribution consists of integrating environmental considerations into all policy areas and of shifting consumption in a direction better suited to the environment, but that both these courses of action have as yet been insufficiently implemented by the Council and the Commission and points out that greater transparency concerning the adverse environmental impact of different products will increase the scope for consumer pressure for greater sustainability, as could ecotaxes;7. Notes that, if the developing countries are to be in a position to integrate the environmental aspect, more relevant technology must be transferred from the rich countries (including the EU); the private sector must become more involved in the work of the CSD, e.g. by offering favourable terms for the sale of licences and patents to the developing countries and by encouraging EU companies to practice the same environmental standards abroad as at home; furthermore, action must be taken to promote the greening of the EU's general development aid;8. Agrees with the Council that new problems need to be identified but is surprised that the Council does not itself make any suggestions;9. Believes it is crucial that the widest possible section of the population should be involved at the preparatory and follow-up stages, with particular emphasis on NGOs, as well as the involvement of regional and local authorities;10. Considers it essential that Heads of State should represent the individual countries, since one of the objectives of the New York conference is to revitalize the whole process and place sustainability at the top of the international agenda;11. Recognizes that institutional frameworks for international environmental cooperation must be strengthened and made effective but emphasizes at the same time that the institutional question must not be used as an excuse for not taking now the necessary decisions pointing the way to sustainable development;12. Believes that parliamentary representatives ought to play an active role in connection with the conference; ideally, the European Parliament ought to be formally associated with the conference with equivalent status to the Commission delegation and at least the same status as it has enjoyed at other conferences ((e.g. at the Ministerial Conference in April 1994 in Marrakesh, at COP I in Berlin in March 1995, at COP II in Geneva in September 1996 and at the WTO Summit in Singapore in December 1996.));13. Observes that the cost of resolving global environmental problems will rise the longer we wait before tackling them seriously and that the EU's common platform at the conference must therefore be more far-reaching than that planned by the Commission and Council;14. Believes that international environmental legislation must be made more binding and retables therefore its proposal for an international environmental court;15. Regards the CSD as the coordinating body that must have responsibility for ensuring that progress towards sustainable development is made as effectively and rapidly as possible and calls on the CSD to create specific tools for achieving measurable results pointing the way to sustainability;16. Agrees with the Council that it would be appropriate for UNGASS, on the basis of an assessment of the global environmental situation, to draw up a detailed work programme for the CSD for the next five years and also endorses the idea that the CSD should, within that framework, give particular priority to certain areas, set precise targets and frame a specific programme for achieving these targets;17. Stresses that the CSD and UNGASS constitute vital staging posts in the political preparation for the COP III meeting on global climate change to be held in Kyoto in December 1997, and that unanimous agreement must therefore be reached in UNGASS on a strong political declaration on climate change and the oceans;18. Calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Council to advocate at these meetings the objective of securing the agreement of all COP III participants to an outcome at Kyoto based on the following principles:- that all further post-Rio commitments be formally enshrined in a legally binding Multilateral Environmental Agreement (MEA) covering at least the period from 2000 to 2100;- that these commitments include, inter alia, the establishment of an absolute maximum limit on global greenhouse gases (GHG) concentrations of not more than 550 ppmv CO2 equivalent, a designated date by which 'emissions standstill¨ will be reached on an equitable basis and a common 'roll-back¨ commitment thereafter;- that these commitments be implemented in accordance with a basic emissions limit set at a level for each country consistent with GHG concentrations of not more than 350 ppmv CO2 (the Green Box), a global reserve bank of emissions rights that shall not exceed 200 Giga tonnes for the duration of the MEA (the Blue Box) and penalties for emissions exceeding the Green and Blue Box allocations (the Red Box);- that the rules and procedures necessary for the application of these principles be agreed by 31 December 1999;19. Considers it to be of the utmost importance that the rich countries increase the transfer of capital to developing countries so as to boost sustainable development, e.g. by increasing the level of development aid substantially;20. Stresses that UNGASS must result in the adoption of an internationally binding forest convention affording a high level of protection and taking particular account of the biological diversity of forests;21. Stresses that the link between trade and the environment is of fundamental importance as regards sustainable development and points out that the overall objective must be fair international trade which takes both environmental and development-related considerations into account; calls on the Commission to present a Green Paper on fair and sustainable trade which includes the idea of border tax adjustments and to discuss this study with both the European Parliament and the Council;22. Emphasizes the importance of the Conference's general conclusions being set out in a specific action- and objective-oriented declaration containing a commitment to holding a further summit in five years' time;23. Regrets that the EU will not be able, on the basis of the action so far taken, to fulfil its pre-Rio undertaking to stabilize CO2 emissions and calls on the Council, the Commission and the Member States at last to take radical action (e.g. a revenue-neutral increase in energy tax);24. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments of the Member States.