Debate: Outcome of the COP in Glasgow
Date: WEDNESDAY, 24 NOVEMBER 2021
Speaker: Frans Timmermans
Language: EN

First, the mythical cost of the transition and that climate policy is ideological. I think by now we can agree that denying the climate crisis is ideological. Science is clear. The evidence is clear. One would have to be blind not to see what is happening in our natural environment globally, everywhere. One would have to be blind not to want to read the report of the Global Climate Panel which is so clear, and the only reason we made such progress in Glasgow is because all countries on Earth have now seen the devastating effect of a 1.1 degree increase of temperature in relation to pre-industrial levels.  That is why we now have the 1.5 enshrined in our decisions and that we have to insist on updating the nationally determined contributions (NDCs) for next year. I would implore, I would ask all of you, wherever you’re from, if you talk about the cost of the transition, in the same breath look at the cost of non-transition, which is so much higher. Not just in financial terms, but in human terms.  What are you going to say, dear friends from the ECR, to the miners in Silesia, if you just say, stay put, don’t change. What are you going to say to those even from your party in Wielkopolska and other parts of Poland, who are engaging in this transition, who have the audacity to say to their voters, guys, there is no future in coal and we need to change. Please, be as audacious as they are and explain that this transition is necessary for our survival, and that the longer we wait with this transition, the higher the cost will be.  And, as Robert Biedroń has just said, 400 000 Europeans die prematurely every year because of bad air quality. They deserve better from us. So please, when you talk about the costs, talk about all the costs, and not seeing the cost of non-transition – that is ideological. Facing the climate crisis is science and, with all due respect to the right side of Parliament, it is great that there are no longer hardly any climate deniers in your camp, but you came a bit late to the party so others are a bit wary of whether this is genuine. But I say, on my behalf, it is genuine, also because the industry understands this and is moving in this direction.  The second point I wanted to make is about the other countries. Two years ago, it was a lonely position to be in as the European Union. The US had as leader a climate denier, China didn’t want to do anything. Look at where we are now. They’re all declaring carbon neutral or climate neutral goals. Even Russia has done that. Russia is even introducing the first pricing of carbon, which would have been unthinkable a year ago. So the world is moving and you are absolutely right. On our own we will not get there, but our example is being followed.  China is introducing an emissions-trading system based on our emissions-trading system. Other major economies know they will all have to put a price on carbon, so they will all be faced with the risk of carbon leakage so they’re all looking at systems such as the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) and comparable systems to avoid carbon leakage. Our solidarity with the developing world was clear in Glasgow. We pushed others, such as the Americans who didn’t want to do that, to do more on adaptation finance. We put the money on the table when it was necessary to do that.  Somebody mentioned Vanuatu, 300 000 people at huge risk. They were well represented with 32 delegates. That is the advantage of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). They do represent more widely those who are most vulnerable. Vanuatu had more representatives at COP than some of our Member States and I think that’s a good thing so that their voices are well heard.  We will have to look at many other measures to keep the developing world on our side. We need to look in the IMF at what we can do with Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) to mobilise them to help climate finance. A wonderful leader such as the Prime Minister of Barbados, Mia Mottley, has given us the direction in which we need to go. We need to listen to them. We need to make sure we amplify their voice and we give them the solutions they need. Enfin, et je poursuis en français, parce que c’est surtout dans la presse française et ici, dans les débats des francophones, qu’on insiste sur l’Europe divisée. L’Europe n’était pas divisée à la COP. Au début, on disait «l’Europe est divisée, on ne la voit pas, elle ne négocie pas», etc. Cela, on ne le dit plus parce qu’il est évident que l’Europe a été très présente. Et je dois ici rendre hommage à la présidence slovène, car c’est grâce à la présidence slovène que j’ai pu négocier tout le temps au nom de toute l’Union européenne. C’est grâce aux réunions qu’on a eues avec tous les ministres. Aucun ministre n’est intervenu dans les débats en plénière. On m’a laissé la parole au nom de tous les États membres de l’Union européenne. C’est ce qui a fait la force de l’Union européenne. Nous n’étions pas divisés. Maintenant, on arrive avec un autre argument: le nucléaire. Le nucléaire prouverait que les Européens sont divisés. Le choix énergétique des États membres est un choix souverain. Il y aura des États membres qui voudront avoir le nucléaire et il y aura des États membres qui ne voudront pas. Mais cela ne nous empêche pas d’avoir des buts en commun pour décarboner notre économie, pour arriver à la neutralité climatique en 2050. Donc, ne laissez pas dire que nous sommes divisés. On a montré que nous pouvions être des leaders à la COP. On a montré qu’on a des projets que d’autres n’ont pas encore. On est copiés partout dans le monde. On a vu aussi les principaux émetteurs adhérer à nos objectifs. Donc oui, c’est vrai: nous sommes encore loin du but. C’est vrai, nous avons un travail immense à faire et ce sera terriblement difficile. Mais il faut convaincre tout le monde. C’est bien d’avoir un but en 2050 ou 2060, mais comme l’a dit Camus, la vraie générosité envers l’avenir consiste à tout donner au présent.