unimelb-nlp/MultiEup-v2 huggingface dataset:
Debate: Question Time  Increasing EU ambitions on biodiversity ahead of COP
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Pernille Weiss
Political group: PPE
Country: Poland
Language: DA

Tak fordi du er her, Kommissær Sinkevičius. Nu handler COP'en jo i høj grad om at blive enige om høje ambitioner, men den handler jo også om at række ud til hinanden med værktøjer og med initiativer. Og jeg kunne godt tænke mig at høre – for det har vi ikke snakket så meget om i den her debat: Hvad kommer EU-Kommissionen til at sende af signaler til forskere, til iværksættere og til investorer, om hvad det er for et fællesskab, hvad det er for et agilt samarbejde, som vi meget gerne vil have i EU, også med forskere og virksomheder, som inviterer nye løsninger – f.eks. biologiske løsninger som biologiske pesticider i stedet for kemiske pesticider, mere digitalisering – også af vores fødevareproduktion, sådan at vi bliver bedre til at passe både på klimaet og på miljøet med indflydelse på biodiversiteten. Hvad bliver beskeden til de investorer og virksomheder, som vi simpelthen ikke har råd til at miste fra EU, så vi kan gøre den forskel for verden, som vi gerne vil.
Debate: Question Time  Increasing EU ambitions on biodiversity ahead of COP
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Pernille Weiss
Political group: PPE
Country: Poland
Language: DA

Jeg har det tillægsspørgsmål og den opfordring til kommissæren, at jeg synes, du skal forholde dig til, at man ude i markederne beder om, at der bliver lavet en et nyt kapitel i taksonomien for "enabling technologies". Det mangler der! Det har vi ikke endnu. Jeg synes også, at du skal lytte til, at der fra rigtig mange stakeholdere bliver bedt om, at der bliver lavet nogle fast track-godkendelsesprocedurer i Kommissionen i forhold til de nye innovative løsninger, som ser anderledes ud end det, som jeres medarbejdere er vant til at se. Det fungerer ikke endnu, og det vil jeg gerne have et svar på, om du kan svare markedet på til COP-15?
Debate: Question Time  Increasing EU ambitions on biodiversity ahead of COP
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Grace O'Sullivan
Political group: Verts/ALE
Country: Greece
Language: EN

Good to see you here today, Commissioner. Look, it’s clear that environmentally harmful subsidies given by the EU are causing significant harm to biodiversity. So can you tell us, is the EU in the high ambition camp regarding commitments to phase out or reform environmentally harmful subsidies?  And related to this, is the Commission on track to produce a methodology to identify environmentally harmful subsidies by 2023, as we committed to in the eighth environmental action programme (8th EAP).  And then in terms of consumption: food production, consumption and overconsumption are having an impact on biodiversity. So what is the EU pushing for in relation to consumption footprint targets and when will the Commission introduce the EU 2030 reduction targets for consumption footprint, another commitment that was in the 8th EAP?  And lastly, in terms of political will: Commissioner, you’re going to the COP15 later in the year but I genuinely feel that we need to call for a legally binding agreement at that Conference because we’ve seen that we failed in the past in terms of biodiversity and monitoring isn’t enough. It has to be legally binding otherwise, as you know and I know, it won’t happen.
Debate: Question Time  Increasing EU ambitions on biodiversity ahead of COP
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Virginijus Sinkevičius
Language: EN

So first of all on the first part on harmful subsidy, so the work is already ongoing and as it’s framed in the ETAP, we will propose it in 2023. We started, of course, with the stakeholder consultations and so we will move on, work with the Member States and then finalise the proposal in 2023. As regards the footprint and reduction of waste, so of course one thing is our waste legislation. Secondly, our ecodesign sustainable product policy, which is really transformative legislation. And last but not least, of course, our proposal on food waste. These all will have a major impact on reduction of the footprint. I think what’s very clear, of course, we have to implement the circular economy action plan. The circular economy action plan will help us to significantly reduce the footprint of our consumption, allowing, first of all, to take responsibility for the consumption patterns that we have here in the EU. But secondly, we also have to look at other legislation which can also significantly contribute. And of course, I count on Parliament’s support on the proposals that already are put on the table. As regards the binding targets in COP 15, so first of all we have to agree on what those targets are. And then depending, I guess, on the outcome of negotiations, depending on the possibilities of funding, we can see what is there to be achieved. At the moment it doesn’t look like the binding targets would be accepted and approved, but we of course must work to ensure and find a way, let’s say, to ensure that what is going to be agreed is implemented. So that’s why the review clauses, the implementation review mechanism and monitoring mechanism can be those tools, and there are many reasons for that. It is not only – I am very sorry I am over the time – there are many reasons for that because for some countries to accept the binding targets is extremely difficult due to national rules, etc., so we also have to bear that in mind. Therefore, I think we have to put very clear and very strong implementation mechanisms.
Debate: Question Time  Increasing EU ambitions on biodiversity ahead of COP
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Grace O'Sullivan
Political group: Verts/ALE
Country: Greece
Language: EN

I know you are a man of ambition and I really do believe you should push for those binding targets. We have them in the climate law and, as I said, if we do not have them binding, they won’t happen. Lastly, on the environmentally harmful subsidies: maybe you could think of a hierarchy, once you identify the environmentally harmful subsidies, a hierarchy of the ones that would give us the greatest effect over the shortest period of time.
Debate: Question Time  Increasing EU ambitions on biodiversity ahead of COP
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Virginijus Sinkevičius
Language: EN

Now as regards the harmful substances, I think one core element which we maybe didn’t mention in our debate today is, of course, the ‘do no significant harm’ principle in our spending – as regards our funds, as regards our multiannual financial framework, as regards our other funds. If that is kept in line, I think that will already have a significant contribution, especially also looking at the recovery and resilience plans from the Member States, which have a very clear notion of ‘do no significant harm’, which was kept in the plans but of course, it’s very important that it would be kept also in the implementation phase.
Debate: Question Time  Increasing EU ambitions on biodiversity ahead of COP
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Sirpa Pietikäinen
Political group: PPE
Country: Italy
Language: EN

I have a very brief question. If we look at the EPAs and the scientific community, they are very clear that 40% of the land and water area should be in a favourable state to support our ecosystems. If we look at that, what are your plans to proceed with this rewilding target in biodiversity of about 20%? Because there seems to be one half missing. This leads to a second question. How are you going to push the higher ambition level internationally? I am not going to take the second question because I can very briefly add then, when we have the targets, what about using Copernicus and artificial intelligence better on supervision and make it more binding?
Debate: Question Time  Increasing EU ambitions on biodiversity ahead of COP
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Virginijus Sinkevičius
Language: EN

Now, when we speak, what we’re able to do. So, first of all, of course, we need to lead by example. We need to prove that our legislation works. We need to use the High Ambition Coalition. During the Lisbon COP, we welcomed the 101st country to the High Ambition Coalition for Nature, which I think is a very positive step, which shows that there is a strong club of ambitious countries which clearly understand the need. We, of course, need to push, together with them, for an ambition which would be implementable, realistic, but yet would allow us to reach a common agreement.  Last but not least on artificial intelligence: I think this is very much an untapped potential, an area which I think can be very well addressed now, during the Czech Presidency, where the Czech Presidency of the Council put the digital and green transitions together, and I think in a very good way we can really rethink on where the digital solutions are going to be crucial to implement our Green Deal ambition. And very quickly, we will be able to see that without the digital solution, we cannot really advance much.  So far in speaking about the COP15 and its resolution, there is no mention of the use of artificial intelligence. But again, I think when it comes to implementation across the board, across the countries, it will be very vastly used.
Debate: Question Time  Increasing EU ambitions on biodiversity ahead of COP
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Anja Hazekamp
Political group: The Left
Country: Germany
Language: NL

De Europese landbouw, met name de intensieve veehouderij, speelt een belangrijke rol bij het biodiversiteitsverlies. Decennialang is er gestuurd op groei en intensivering van de veehouderij door subsidies, door overheden, door banken. Nederland is nu een van de landen die eindelijk inziet dat de hoeveelheid stikstof die in natuurgebieden terechtkomt, drastisch moet verminderen. En dat betekent onherroepelijk ook dat het aantal dieren in de vee-industrie drastisch moet verminderen. Eindelijk, zou ik zeggen. Minder dieren betekent ook minder mest en minder ammoniak. Maar dat leidt ook tot heftige protesten van boeren, die wegen blokkeren, ministers intimideren en zelfs natuurgebieden vernietigen. Wat zou uw boodschap zijn aan ministers die nu geconfronteerd worden met een verlies aan biodiversiteit, maar ook met boze boeren? Hoe leg je uit dat jarenlang een beleid van onverschilligheid niet langer houdbaar is? En hoe leg je uit dat uitstel geen optie is en dat onze planeet enkel een kans maakt als de doelen eindelijk gehaald worden?
Debate: Question Time  Increasing EU ambitions on biodiversity ahead of COP
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Virginijus Sinkevičius
Language: EN

But this issue aggravated, not yesterday and not even a year before, the implementation of the Nitrates Directive has been hanging there since around the 1960s. So the answer here is of course very simple, even so, that it is hardly applicable for today. But in order to be compliant with the EU rules, you had to take measures since the very beginning, and of course over time that wouldn’t be so drastically painful. But unfortunately, when the measures were taken in the opposite direction, we find ourselves in a very difficult situation which will require now a significant investment from taxpayers’ money to ensure that of course there is a full compliance with EU legislation. Just this morning I was discussing with Spanish colleagues the situation in Mar Menor, in which a very dynamic, very touristy area became basically uninhabitable. This is what happens at the end of the day when you have a nutrient runoff. So I think we have agreed a very clear plan with the Dutch Government of how to implement the legislation. Many Member States went through that and did the implementation, and I think we will find a way forward with the Dutch Government as well. It’s very important that the funds that are allocated would be of course precisely used for those who will be affected most in that transition.
Debate: Question Time  Increasing EU ambitions on biodiversity ahead of COP
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Jutta Paulus
Political group: Verts/ALE
Country: Portugal
Language: EN

Thank you very much for giving me your space. And I’ll be very brief in trying to make the circle to come back to where we started, because the question was EU ambitions on biodiversity ahead of COP 15. And I think if we’ll look at the restoration law which you presented last week, it is already quite good. But the crucial point is, what means of governance do we have? What means of actually enforcing what is there as an ambition? And it’s a bit the same on the global level, whereas it is much easier within the European Union because there we have the structures where the Commission can actually tell Member States, well, if you do not abide by the law, then we might start writing letters and later infringement procedures, which is not possible on the global level. So how do you think might the restoration law influence the negotiations at the COP 15? And especially, how can it be perceived in the Global South that the EU, or generally spoken the Global North, does not come forward as colonialist, telling the Global South how to act on biodiversity?
Debate: Question Time  Increasing EU ambitions on biodiversity ahead of COP
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Virginijus Sinkevičius
Language: EN

One of the ways could be through the funding mechanism, as I've mentioned, through the agreed possible fund per project, where that could be possibly achieved. Secondly, of course, monitoring can be done always returning back at the meetings, at the COP meetings, where we could evaluate the progress and then, of course, the reporting also has to be very clear. So it's not an easy way through that. But I think what's very important, first of all, is to reach the commitment of all, all sitting at that table and agreeing on the urgency. Then secondly, we have to meet that urgency with funding mechanisms which would allow us to then ensure the implementation of the proposed targets.
Debate: Question Time  Increasing EU ambitions on biodiversity ahead of COP
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Rainer Wieland
Country: Germany
Language: DE

Damit ist die Fragestunde beendet. Ich bitte auch um Verständnis. Wir haben für die Fragestunde 90 Minuten angesetzt. Die sind jetzt um. Wir wissen nicht, wie viele Zusatzfragen jeweils kommen. Wir versuchen, das auszubalancieren. Ich will auch einmal sagen, dass wir dafür vereinbart haben, dass d’Hondt für die Fraktionen Anwendung findet und dass, wenn alle Fraktionen ihre Möglichkeiten ausgeschöpft hätten, die letzten zwei oder drei Redner beziehungsweise Fragesteller nicht zum Zuge gekommen wären. Das heißt: Wir haben da schon ein Maß an Flexibilität, und jetzt sind auch schon wieder Leute weggegangen, die ich dann zuerst berücksichtigen sollte. Da habe ich vorhin meine Entscheidung getroffen und will sie auch nicht mehr ändern. Damit ist die Fragestunde abgeschlossen.
Debate: Welcome
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Othmar Karas
Country: Germany
Language: DE

Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Bevor wir jetzt mit der Tagesordnung fortfahren, möchte ich sehr deutlich zum Ausdruck bringen, dass wir uns sehr geehrt fühlen, den Sprecher des jordanischen Repräsentantenhauses, seine Exzellenz Herrn Abdel-Karim Deghmi, und eine gemeinsame Delegation des jordanischen Senats und des jordanischen Repräsentantenhauses auf der Diplomatengalerie begrüßen zu dürfen. Herzlich willkommen im Europäischen Parlament! Die Delegation ist hier, um am 10. Interparlamentarischen Treffen EU-Jordanien mit der Delegation für die Beziehungen zu den Maschrik-Ländern teilzunehmen, das morgen Nachmittag um 15.30 Uhr stattfindet. Nochmals herzlich willkommen und die besten Grüße des Europäischen Parlaments an die Bürgerinnen und Bürger Ihres Heimatlandes Jordanien!
Debate: Objection pursuant to Rule  Amending the Taxonomy Climate Delegated Act and the Taxonomy Disclosures Delegated Act
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Othmar Karas
Country: Germany
Language: DE

Wir kommen nun zum nächsten Punkt der Tagesordnung, dem Einwand gemäß Artikel 111 Absatz 3 der Geschäftsordnung: Änderung des delegierten Rechtsakts zur Klimataxonomie und des delegierten Rechtsakts zur Offenlegung der Taxonomie ( Ich darf zu dieser Aussprache auch die zuständige Kommissarin, Frau McGuinness, willkommen heißen. Ich möchte Sie noch einmal daran erinnern, dass die gesamte Vorgangsweise bei dieser Aussprache so ist, wie wir das bei den letzten Tagesordnungspunkten gehandhabt haben. Ich brauche dies nicht zu wiederholen.
Debate: Objection pursuant to Rule  Amending the Taxonomy Climate Delegated Act and the Taxonomy Disclosures Delegated Act
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Bas Eickhout
Country: France
Language: EN

Unfortunately, in the proposal, and we are having that discussion for a longer while already, you are green or you are not green. I know some are saying that there are different categories, but in the end – and that is now also very clear from any ongoing and follow up on any legislation, think for example of the green bonds – the moment you comply with the taxonomy and there is taxonomy alignment, then there is a green label and you are having a green bond. So there is no ‘amber’ category at all or whatsoever. Secondly, on the process – and here the Parliament has been very clear – the Parliament has been sidelined in this process. When we had the first delegated acts, there was a very clear public consultation for weeks, and then it took months before that delegated act was being published. On this second complementary delegated act, there was no public consultation. The Member States were being asked to reply too, the Parliament was only unofficially invited, but there was no formal consultation and the Parliament can only say something now. On the contents, on nuclear first of all, it’s very controversial. Will any investor really step in because of a green label? Absolutely not, because an investor will need security from the government. This green label will not work and will not help. This is a pure political game by France. The criteria are written by France, for France. Even the Netherlands has said that the criteria they cannot comply with. This clearly shows that this is a political game by France only. Then, on gas, first of all, we are making a separate category here for gas and having a higher emission threshold over other energy. Everyone who is claiming we need to be technology—neutral, why are we then having a separate category for gas and for the others you still have a threshold of over 100, whereas for gas it can be 270. This is not technology—neutral. And on top of that, we now have the war in Ukraine. How can we label gas green, and LNG terminals will not comply, but gas from Russia can? That is the opposite direction and we have to stop this idea. This is the moment to stop this delegated act.
Debate: Objection pursuant to Rule  Amending the Taxonomy Climate Delegated Act and the Taxonomy Disclosures Delegated Act
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Sirpa Pietikäinen
Country: Italy
Language: EN

And what the platform proposed was not this what the Commission is proposing. It says it needs to have ‘clear indicators’. Well, that can be doubted in this case. It says clearly it needs to be substantially better than the industry average, and that is the industry that we are talking about, substantially better than the nuclear in general. Substantially better than the gas in general. And it means that now when we look at the delegated acts, how can anyone say that if you have old—fashioned Russian nuclear reactors – where you have a plan for the waste treatment by 2040 – that is the best gold standard of the nuclear energy in the European global market. And the Parliament and the negotiating team was open to discuss this point, for example. We might disagree or agree about what is the role of nuclear in the future, but if you include nuclear, it should have been that kind of a technology that has the plans already for the waste treatment. The new model of small nuclear; maybe in future fusion, if we are talking about as long as a 2040 timeline, and those ones in technology that are recycling and reusing the fuel. So there are plenty of options that from the bottom of my heart I really would have hoped the Commission would have used. And with gas, in some cases it goes close to ‘do no significant harm’ limits when we are talking about a temporary use of gas. So disappointed. Not in the line of the first level of the regulation. There’s a severe brake on this and this has been the reaction by the financial market investors already. None of them are labelling gas or nuclear as green investment. So the EU, according to this proposal, would do that. And there is a strong signal that this might discredit the whole process.
Debate: Objection pursuant to Rule  Amending the Taxonomy Climate Delegated Act and the Taxonomy Disclosures Delegated Act
Date: TUESDAY, 5 JULY 2022
Speaker: Markus Ferber
Political group: PPE
Country: Italy
Language: DE

Wir wollten auf Basis wissenschaftlicher Fakten einen Transparenzstandard schaffen, der Marktteilnehmern Investitionsentscheidungen in nachhaltige Investments erleichtern soll. Wenn wir den delegierten Rechtsakt, der auf dem Tisch liegt, an diesem Standard messen, kann man eigentlich nur zu dem Schluss kommen, dass dieser delegierte Rechtsakt diesem Anspruch nicht genügt. Dafür gibt es zwei Gründe, die eng miteinander zusammenhängen. Erstens: Ich glaube, man kann nicht bestreiten, dass dieser delegierte Rechtsakt nicht nach wissenschaftlichen, sondern nach politischen Kriterien zusammengestellt wurde. Die Kommission hat ganz genau überlegt, wie man die beiden Elemente Gas und Kernenergie, die miteinander nichts zu tun haben, so miteinander kombiniert, dass sie sich gegenseitig neutralisieren. Das hat nichts mit Wissenschaft zu tun, das ist Politik. Zweitens: Die Kommission hat einen Standard vorgelegt, der vielleicht für eine kritische Masse an Mitgliedstaaten akzeptabel ist, aber nicht für eine kritische Masse an Marktteilnehmern. Um es ganz deutlich zu sagen: Anleger, die grüne Investments tätigen wollen, wollen keine Gaskraftwerke und keine Atomkraftwerke finanzieren. Deswegen kann eine solche Taxonomie auch nicht funktionieren. Wir haben also einen Standard vorliegen, der nicht nach wissenschaftlichen Kriterien erdacht wurde und der den Marktteilnehmern nichts nützt, und deswegen werde ich ihn ablehnen.