C 152/162
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
6.4.2022
the Social Climate Fund with other available financial resources and to use it in the most efficient way.
At the same time, the introduction of a Social Climate Fund must be seen in the context of the entire Fit for 55 package.
3.3.
The EESC points out that the envisaged climate measures and their impacts may further exacerbate already existing inequalities.
The EESC calls on the Commission, the Council and the Parliament to place the principle of a just transition at the centre of their measures to mitigate climate change.
3.4.
The measures and transformation steps envisaged by the Fit for 55 package will lead to massive changes and must not lose sight of the social and economic situation of the individual Member States.
Otherwise, societal acceptance of these measures would be jeopardised.
At Member State level, measures accompanying the package must already be discussed and implemented now.
To achieve a just ecological transformation, the focus here must be on a just transition for all.
3.5.
The volume of the Fund will amount to EUR 72,2 billion between 2025 and 2032, using 25 per cent of ETS revenues from the transport and buildings sectors.
Compared to the challenges posed by such an extension of the ETS, this is a very small amount.
The EESC believes that the purpose of higher carbon pricing is in any case not to increase revenue, but to steer market behaviour towards low-emission technologies.
There is therefore a strong argument for providing additional financial resources on the part of the Commission and the Member States.
Furthermore, the time limit of 2032 does not seem conclusive.
3.6.
Some stakeholders, including the social partners, representing employers and employees, have been sceptical and even negative about extending emissions trading to buildings and road transport, pointing to the expected social and economic impacts of an increase in heating and fuel prices on financially weaker households, medium-, small- and micro-enterprises and transport users.
The danger of not taking the population along with us in the course of European climate policy and a flare-up of widespread protests, such as the ‘yellow vests’ protests, must be prevented at all costs.
In this regard, the Commission should subject its plans to a thorough examination.
3.7.
The EESC regrets that the Commission did not analyse the impact of the Fit for 55 package on individual Member States, nor on different sectors.
It is of the opinion that a specific impact assessment of the Social Climate Fund creation would have deserved to be carried out.
3.8.
Low-income households already face different difficulties in the current system, for which, in addition to short-term support, long-term and thus sustainable solutions are needed.
In the EESC’s view, the EU needs robust funding at EU level that will mitigate the socioeconomic impact of the climate measures and ensure a just transition.
Therefore, the introduction of a social climate fund at EU level is also fundamentally necessary in the EESC’s view and should not be tied to the introduction of an ETS on the buildings and transport sectors.
In particular, based on a study by the European Climate Foundation (7), according to which ‘an expanded ETS alone would not deliver the substantial emission reductions needed in road transport and buildings’.
3.9.
Although the EESC welcomes the establishment of the proposed Social Climate Fund in principle, it points out that its financing depends on the introduction of an emissions trading system for buildings and transport (Article 26).
Housing and mobility are basic needs and their provision is therefore part of services of general interest.
The EESC is concerned that the costs of an emissions trading system for buildings and transport would outweigh the desired benefits and could lead to uncontrolled and therefore existence-threatening price spikes.
The EESC is therefore generally critical about the Social Climate Fund being tied to the introduction of an ETS for buildings and transport and would welcome a specific heading in the EU budget dedicated to the social impact of the green transition.
Rather, the introduction of a Social Climate Fund at EU level should be pursued in principle.
3.10.
The Fund provides for social compensation payments on the one hand, and incentives for electric vehicles, as well as investments in the charging infrastructure and the decarbonisation of buildings, on the other hand.
However, the needs of low-income households should be taken into account and measures linked to electrification of mobility should be all-embracing and future-looking, allowing low-income households the use of e-urban mobility or of new business models such as carsharing.
The EESC points out that the promotion of zero- and low-emission mobility should not only
(7)
European Climate Foundation Decarbonising European transport and heating fuels — Is the EU ETS the right tool?
https://europeanclimate.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/01-07-2020-decarbonising-european-transport-and-heating-fuels-fullreport.pdf