Debate: Conclusions of the European Council meeting of - December  – MFF, Rule of Law Conditionality and Own Resources – Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years  to  – Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, as well as on new own resources, including a roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources – Regulation on the protection of the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States
Date: WEDNESDAY, 16 DECEMBER 2020
Speaker: Ska Keller
Political group: Verts/ALE
Country: Sweden
Language: EN

Mr Orbán and Mr Kaczyński, you neither serve your citizens nor our common European future, and in the light of such blackmail we all need to stay and stand strong. And therefore it is really worrying to see the European Council’s attempt to interpret the political agreement and the law agreed by the European Parliament and the Council. That is highly problematic.  Probably even more worrying is the Commission’s role in this affair. The Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, must reaffirm that its intention is to apply the legislation to the latter as agreed by the co—legislators and without any delay, and that also means not waiting for some judgments until some guidelines are drawn up. We have a law  in place. It needs to be applied without delay – that is crucial.  Coupled with the Presidency’s failure to organise a hearing on the Article 7 proceedings on Hungary, this really makes for a poor track record for the European Union in its tackling of systemic democratic regressions in the middle of our common Union.  I want to stress again that the only law agreed is what Parliament and Council as co—legislators have decided previously. Nothing of that law has changed, nothing of that law will change, and it needs to be enforced as of 1 January 2021 for both the current and the upcoming MFF. On Climate Action, I welcome the fact that the governments managed to strengthen the European 2030 emission reduction targets, though a net decrease of at least -55% is still far short of the scientific consensus which is needed (-65%). Parliament has made a strong mandate of a greenhouse gas emission of -60%, which we will continue to fight for in the upcoming weeks and months because, again, the law has been made according to the normal legislative procedure. However, the target agreed by the Council of a 55% reduction is not an absolute but a net target, which is extremely worrying. And yes, of course we must protect and restore land, forests and other ecosystems in our fight to reverse climate change, but this should never be compensation for lessening efforts by the biggest emitters. If the European Union is to be a global leader in fighting climate change, we will need to do more than just come up with some creative calculations.  It’s regrettable that the European Council gave in to pressure from the usual suspects, I have to say, to endorse in its conclusions gas as a transitional fuel, which it is simply not. If we are to overcome the climate crisis, the future has to be completely fossil fuel-free. The exclusion of all fossil fuels from the Just Transition Fund was a clear signal and the European Council should have followed suit. We expect and we need more ambition to tackle the problems at hand and we need fewer double standards from the Heads of State and Government. I hope this will improve in the future and I count on our common normal legal proceedings in order to draw up a good climate law.