kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
bearing in mind we're in the eurozone and our banks are charging two to three times the interest rates that the rest of europe pays in mortgages and lending to small and medium sized businesses.
we know that an fta can have only a very small chapter on financial services addressing only the right of establishment and prudential carve out mechanism and eu financial services are about the single market and it is clear now that it will be an equivalence mechanism that will provide the main framework for the relationship.
as equivalence is a unilateral discretionary policy tool in order to make it deliver we will need constructive cooperation with uk regulators and supervisors to protect the financial stability and integrity of our financial markets protect investors and consumers as well as ensuring lpf.
but all of us here in this house must also be aware that for an ambitious beneficial and successful future relationship with the uk in the area of financial services it is our duty also to complete as soon as possible the banking union and build a genuine capital market union.
as greens we call for three elements of a responsible flood policy.
we also need to take a whole catchment approach and consider how our farming practices have reduced the land's ability to absorb rainfall for longer before it drains into the river. land management that involves maintaining hedges and trees using organic methods that reduce soil run off should be prioritised in the cap subsidiary scheme.
first there needs to be adequate investment in the infrastructure that prevents flooding and we must not allow austerity cuts to increase the risk as our communities become inundated.
thirdly we must make explicit the link between flooding and climate change and be reminded by flooding incidents across europe of the urgent need to agree meaningful carbon dioxide reductions at the cop twenty one negotiations in paris next year.
this brings me to my second point.
another major benefit investment in prevention is cost effective.
flood risk management plans focusing on prevention protection and preparedness should set the objectives and include the measures to achieve flood risk reduction.
we need to put disaster management firmly on the agenda of eu finance ministers because it is cost effective.
there are also provisions to disaster proof new investments funded by the eu's structural funds.
a concrete example of support is the eu strategy for the danube region supporting projects to develop a common risk assessment methodology for the region.
cross border and transnational cooperation on flood prevention;
now the first estimates for the new two thousand and fourteen two thousand and twenty period show that this sum would increase to eur seventy eight billion. related projects include maintaining or developing flood plains such as along the tisza river in hungary;
hit. so the commission is implementing the approach across various policy areas including civil protection the environment and also regional policy and research and development.
on average for instance every euro spent on prevention saves between four and seven euros that would have been spent once a disaster has
by investing euros in prevention we save much more when disasters actually
flood prevention is actually receiving the bulk of available regional policy funds earmarked for risk prevention. for instance for the two thousand and seven two thousand and thirteen period funding made available to member states to invest in risk prevention including against
the most visible piece of eu legislation relating to flood management is certainly the floods directive which has been in force since two thousand and seven and which establishes a framework for the assessment and management of flood risks.
that is why we have the floods directive which although it is not a financial instrument in itself is a legal instrument for coordination and cooperation between member states in response to natural disasters of this kind.
it can only be used ex post facto and even then it has to be activated by an application from the country concerned.
there is no pre allocation of funds. it depends on the type of disaster; it depends on the type of damage.
as to the question is it true that different funds have been allocated to different countries?
to prevent something;
as regards prevention and i made it clear in my statement how cost effective prevention is there is no specific fund in the european union just for floods.
i should like to inform members that due to the partial unavailability of interpreters from ireland because of the travel limitations there will be no interpretation from and to gaelic guaranteed today from. sixteen fifteen until.
the sooner we start the earlier the benefits.
let's use that and create more international cooperation and then fifty five i think is very important.
two thousand and thirty so we shouldn't hide the fact that this is going to be as i said bloody difficult to do but just imagine for one second the cost of non action.
i also maintain it is in line with our international obligations.
now of course on the other side of the chamber you want a higher target.
we should be leading but also taking others along the way.
that's why just transition is essential.
what's the cost if people are saying here we should keep all these coal mines open but there's no market for the coal what's the cost of keeping people in jobs that have no future?
the fact that south africa has now said we want to be climate neutral by two thousand and fifty' that's huge for a country like south africa.
it is hard to do and we will ask sacrifice of everyone industry our citizens the transport system etc.
look at the state of our forests.
what's the cost of that?
if we continue like this there will be no pollinators anymore.
individual member states can no longer do that.
secondly in the same context don't come at me with sovereignty we need to do it at the national level'.
it's expensive.
first of all to those people mostly sitting here who are always referring to the citizens to not be ambitious.
if you look at our impact assessment and to put it in layman's terms this is going to be bloody hard to do!
well let me be very clear.
another remark in reaction to some of the criticisms the costs.
our citizens understand this is a problem we can only tackle on a global level and that europe needs to take the leadership as europe.
well if there's one thing that's consistent over the last year even in the middle of the pandemic a large majority of our citizens want us to act to face the climate crisis. it is the citizens who are asking this of us even in the middle of the pandemic when they're very much worried about their health when they are very much worried about their jobs they still see the climate crisis as something they want us to act upon.
it's a tough job but it can be done and the sooner we start the lower the cost.
look at what's happening with biodiversity in europe.
what's the cost of another monthly gota fria in valencia if we don't do something about that?
how are you going to explain that to the farmers when they say let's keep the present agricultural policy'?
i say this with force because i do not like the argument that we should be doing more because other industrialised nations are doing less.
we need to help people find new jobs retrain them but show solidarity.
the cost is huge.
i maintain that fifty five is difficult but feasible.
carbon sink is diminishing in europe. we need to increase it.
without just transition there will just be no transition and we will never get to our fifty five goal.
there will be no agriculture if there's no water for the land.
i would say that we have a big majority who see the necessity of doing more and who see that it's not a sustainable way to keep giving subsidies to a system that is old.
i would like to paint a picture of a house that's on fire.
the scientists saw that the installation and the heating system is not functioning anymore.
some others pointed out the importance of giving us more time.
yes we need to do it together. it's not ok if some member states are not there helping out.
last but not least it has been a privilege to work in this house together with the shadows.
many also pointed out the necessity of doing it together.
no sorry we don't have that.
then the reparation will take further time and we don't have the time.
this planet is on fire and the young people the young movement noticed it and heard the alarm faster than many others.
i would like to paint a picture inspired by a young climate activist who doesn't need to be presented.
i also would like to hope that the epp is a bit consistent because we have been fighting international offsets under the kyoto protocol together and now i see amendments of the epp group bringing back these international offsets and further watering down the targets we are discussing. i think this is really a problem.
maybe they didn't realise what they were signing up to because it was just a resolution.
in this house time and time and again we signed up to climate neutrality in thirty years' time.
if you sign up to these targets you also have to translate it into a binding law which we are discussing now for.
in this house last year we all signed up to the climate emergency.
now in the climate law we are going to act and suddenly you see people getting nervous.
please epp stay a bit consistent for once.
if we invest hundreds of billions of euros in rescuing our economy from this pandemic we must not throw money at the old economy. we must guide our societies to a cleaner and healthier future one that our children can embrace with hope not fear. we must be very clear and very honest about this.
i'm really happy to discuss with you today what is i think a landmark of the european green deal the climate law to turn europe's political climate ambitions into binding legislation. moving towards a climate neutral future is the right thing to do for our children and future generations especially now and everything we're doing
that provides certainty at a time when so much is uncertain.
i'm confident that we can make it if we do two things if we set ourselves a sound direction and stand together as a continent in mastering the challenge.
it shows responsibility towards developing countries but doesn't take on an undue burden given the ambition needed from other industrial nations. i think it's the right target.
we will stand with you to make the journey to climate neutrality with us.
we propose to reduce our emissions over the next decade by as much as we have achieved over the past quarter century.
i'm open to discuss which instruments should get us there.
the target is also economywide all sectors must contribute no exceptions granted and it's a domestic objective delivered in europe to inspire the world to follow our lead and we see across the world other nations following the lead already.
two thousand and forty there is criticism of our proposal to use delegated acts to check whether we're on track for that pathway.
i have to say i'm really impressed by the work the commission services have done on this.
tomorrow you will vote on turning our climate ambitions into binding law.
this is no accounting trick or cheat code it's the reality of how we neutralise the negative impact of human activity on our planet and care for our natural habitat.
let's set our pathway towards climate neutrality as quickly as possible and start walking along this path together as quickly as possible.
we must help households in regions that are at risk of being left behind.
we will push for an ambitious sevenyear budget to finance our climate ambitions but i want to thank parliament and ms guteland in particular already for the work on this historic piece of legislation the climate law.
we will continue developing our just transition mechanism to deliver a new future to regions where the path towards climate neutrality is particularly steep.
we will soon propose a renovation wave to lower energy bills and fight energy poverty.
the commission will be an honest broker for negotiations between parliament and council.
this is our message to the miners in asturias the workers on baltic peatlands and many many others.
we did a thorough impact assessment as i had promised to this house.
please help me find a solution that we can all support.
for two thousand and thirty we need to increase our ambition if we want a realistic pathway to climate neutrality.
including the full sink in our climate target in line with our international obligations will drive us to take better care of our forests and sinks so that they can play this vital role and also give an opportunity to rural communities.
ambitious climate action is what we need in europe today and in the world.
i know that this proposal goes too far for some and for others not far enough but the target is ambitious.
let me repeat today and you know this is my opinion what counts is that we reach our goals.
this is a unionwide commitment to climate neutrality with a just transition for all.
rather than waiting for two thousand and fifty we want to recognise the role of natural carbon sinks now.
the target is well founded in science.
the transition is just has to be just or there will just be no transition.
let me address the role of forests and other landscapes that remove co two from our atmosphere. the point of climate neutrality in two thousand and fifty is that by that year we must balance co two emissions with removals taking out what we put in if you prefer a cruder expression.
the climate law will set the direction by making our two thousand and fifty climate neutrality goal binding.
i want to stress three points.
this transition will affect our daily lives from the cars we drive from the houses we live in from the jobs we will have in the future.
we must have official international legallybinding commitments that see every single decision we make as individuals and as nations benchmarked against the goal of climate neutrality.
two thousand and thirty the implementation of the paris agreement is essential to achieving the sustainable development goals by.
we have to slash greenhouse gas emissions within a timeframe that gives us some hope of avoiding a total wipeout of life on our planet.
we must set a truly ambitious target that will create the change we need by.
our vote here this evening is a culmination of calls for action from citizens across the globe who recognise the emergency we are in.
firstly on what we delivered one thing is clear people expect results from the european union.
this is important this is not small this is concrete and this will help overcome the crisis and make the lives of people better within the member states of the european union.
outside of the european union people are looking towards us with expectations and i want to say one thing very clearly in order to live in stability and safety within the european union we need to be surrounded by countries which are safe and stable and for stability rules are essential and values are essential.
and as we look to this year we have to keep in mind two things firstly we delivered this year for the people of europe and secondly people outside of the eu outside of our twenty seven member states are looking up towards the european union towards the eu institutions and they have high expectations of us.
this is why we need to stand up for the defence of european values also in the countries in our immediate neighbourhood and we should use all the tools that we have available to defend eu values in countries which are our immediate neighbours.
we got our act together during the crisis we provided concrete results and now we are finalising negotiations to provide the biggest financial support to member states which are in need of eur seven hundred and fifty billion.
if we want to ensure new and fair elections much more pressure from the eu is necessary and freedom of speech association and media is vital to preserve democratic rights in belarus.
this is the time for the eu to show some of the courage that the people in belarus show us every day.
and this is why calling for an inclusive national dialogue is important but not enough.
we need to finish deals with mercosur mexico australia new zealand and taiwan to mention a few.
with this report we the european parliament take our position for the future.
the report covers ongoing negotiations implementation of free trade agreements wto issues relations with the us china the uk and other important partners as well as smes trade and sustainable developments and digital trade and services.
my main message here is that of european competitiveness that this is not the time for protectionism.
so are those to third countries.
instead rules based free trade is even more important now and we must diversify our value chains not shorten them.
the response to a decline in trade due to the crisis shouldn't be political control of companies' value chains.
this is the way forward to secure our resilience supply and growth and trade agreements play an important role in this. and we need to remove trade barriers. export restrictions on the internal market are unacceptable;
i therefore focus on the recent developments in the two last years and i look to the future because this is also the input to the commission's trade policy review and to the incoming trade commissioner.
this report is also our response to the covid nineteen crisis.
we push back protectionism and pave the way for a competitive europe.
in the last few years we have closed trade deals with canada japan singapore and vietnam.
thereafter emissions shall be negative. everyone must contribute to reach the climate neutrality objective.
elements of social fairness and solidarity have been strengthened throughout the regulation.
this is not good enough.
it must be socially just and we must make sure that it's for all the citizens.
we will only succeed in our climate efforts if everyone is with us if no one is left behind.
i will conclude by saying this is a good proposal.
we also emphasise the importance of social partners which i'm very proud
to further reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase the carbon sequestration potential.
the report that we will see voted on this afternoon improves the commission's proposal on a number of points and colleagues we are responsible for this;
which europe will undergo in the coming decades.
we need to listen to citizens scientists and the movement of young people and do our very best to improve this legislation and make it responsible for our time. the report sets a binding target for the union and the member states to achieve climate neutrality by two thousand and fifty at the latest.
by. two thousand and fifty to take responsible climate action we also need to know exactly how much europe can emit without undermining the union's commitment under the paris agreement.
we are moving away from our history as the coal and steel union and heading towards climate neutrality.
we need a stronger target if we are serious about respecting the paris agreement and our own responsibility to reach climate neutrality. this is also why the report includes a new eu climate target for.
of. there are also strong provisions on science not to mention the set up of an independent climate council at european level the european climate change council which with the creation of climate advisory bodies at member state level will assess whether we are on track to achieve the climate neutrality objective and identify opportunities
furthermore the provisions for climate adaptation have been strengthened with increased consideration of vulnerable groups.
i would like to underline the importance of the reference to the two thousand and fifteen international labour organization's guidelines for a just transition towards environmentally sustainable economies and societies.
we need to have a higher target for. two thousand and thirty the commission has proposed a net target of at least fifty five for two thousand and thirty meaning approximately between fifty one and fifty three in real emission reductions depending on how much greenhouse
for the sd group this is fundamental.
i would like to thank my colleagues all the shadows all the people that worked with this legislation the advisors and also the interpretation which has been good the technical advisers.
this is something we need to do together.
the european climate law is indeed the cornerstone of the european green deal as it enshrines into legislation the union's objective to reach net zero greenhouse gas emissions by two thousand and fifty at the latest. the climate neutrality objective brings with it a transition of historic dimension
gas our natural sinks will be able to remove from the atmosphere.
let us all speak about the way forests can help the ambitious goals we set in the climate law.
this is why i ask you to support and ask you to vote for amendment.
the report speaks often in optimistic terms about forest management in the eu and less about the protection of forests and biodiversity.
passing this report as it is would be like looking at our greatest resource in the fight against climate change and only seeing a business.
two let us call on the commission and the member states to set targets for forest covers to call for strict protection of oldgrowth and primary forests.
forest protection provides us with hope gives us a chance to have a buffer against the worst dangers of climate change.
i expect that the upcoming mobility strategy and the legislative proposals by the commission will deeply transform the sector.
now when these same young people have started to vote we are witnessing green waves country by country.
today we have the chance to vote for something historic the european climate law.
madam president for months and even years youngsters have taken to the streets and called for action on climate change.
given their greater responsibility for historic emissions the betteroff nations like in europe must do it a lot faster.
gdp may speak for the welfare of capitalism but not for the welfare of humanity.
we need real zero carbon emissions by two thousand and forty and we cannot rely on negative emissions technologies that might never even exist.
scientists say that we will fail if we keep growing the economy at the same rate.
why are we continuing to prop up the fossil fuel industry?
the report points out that healthy and resilient forests are a precondition for the general well being of our forests as well as for their economic and social sustainability.
the report addresses the importance of enhancing forest biodiversity;
forests and the forest based sector have a crucial role to play in achieving the union's climate environmental and biodiversity goals namely within the green deal.
it also emphasises the important role of sustainable forest management and bioeconomy at a time when forests are playing a key role in offering sustainable solutions to the challenges of our time.
the commission will publish its new forest strategy during the first quarter of. two thousand and twenty one the previous strategy was published in two thousand and thirteen so a new one is now needed for the post two thousand and twenty period.
the report calls for the protection of primary forests.
in addition it is crucial to ensure appropriate measures to prevent natural disasters such as bark beetle epidemics droughts and forest fires.
it should highlight a balanced approach between the economic ecological and social sustainability of forests to ensure the continuity of the multifunctional role of forests in the european union.
it also addresses afforestation and reforestation as suitable tools in enhancing forest cover.
forests and the forest based value chain offer crucial climate benefits such as the promotion of carbon sequestration the storage of carbon in wood based products and the substitution of fossil based raw materials and energy.
the new eu forest strategy should act as an effective coordination tool between the various eu forest related policies taking into account the whole forest based value chain.
lastly the report notes that the jobs within the sector are dependent on resilient and well managed forest ecosystems in the long term.