Debate: The attack on climate and nature: far right and conservative attempts to destroy the Green Deal and prevent investment in our future
Date: WEDNESDAY, 24 APRIL 2024
Speaker: Virginijus Sinkevičius
Language: EN

First of all, as regards Ms Bentele, Mr Canfin, Mr Liese, you all said, and it is absolutely true, that the most of the Green Deal legislation was approved in this House by a large majority. The Green Deal achievements of this mandate are our joint achievements, and we should say this loudly and clearly. But the reality is that there are also important pieces in this puzzle still missing, and without these pieces, like the Nature Restoration Law, we will miss crucial tools to meet the binding targets we have jointly agreed and subscribed in the EU Climate Law. We would discard an indispensable instrument that can help us becoming more resilient towards the devastating effects of climate change. So I therefore urge Member States to now fully take their responsibility and get this law over the finishing line. Unfortunately, many interventions today show that we still tend to overlook the value of nature. Let me recall some additional figures and facts. In 2019, the economic value provided by the wider set of ecosystem services in the EU amounted to EUR 243 billion. The UN calculated that losing the benefits provided by the healthy ecosystems could cause a decline in global GDP of USD 2.7 trillion annually by 2030. And finally, the European Central Bank points out that nearly 75% of all bank loans in the euro area go to companies that are highly dependent on at least one ecosystem service, and severe losses of functionality in those ecosystems would cause critical problems for those companies. No, climate and biodiversity policies are not a threat to our economies, but quite on the contrary, the cost of clean-up, for example, of the Slovenian floods, stands at over 16% of Slovenian GDP: 16%! So more than a tenth of what Slovenians earn altogether had to go to clean up damages of the event that may well be repeated. These are concrete reminders of the costs at stake. These are real figures, and behind these figures there are these are real people whose lives are affected. Let me also say a few words on farming because this is also extremely important. But listening to claims that farmers were protesting against the Green Deal means not listening to farmers demands, because if you look concretely at what farmers asked, there were demands concretely going as regards the common agricultural policy and Gaia-X implementation and trade measures, which if we implement the Green Deal and if we ensure that the Green Deal is implemented outside the EU, the farmers will have a level playing field. When it comes to CAP, let’s not forget that the CAP, which was finalised in this mandate, was proposed by the previous Commission, so it is way behind the Green Deal was actually introduced. Let’s be clear. Let’s listen to our farmers demands, and try to implement the exact steps needed so that they would be competitive, that they would receive a fair price for their hard work. That’s the core of the Green Deal. The Green Deal does not go against the farmers’ interest. On the contrary, if there is no clean water, if the ecosystem is degraded and the soil is not fertile, we won’t have any farmers, and that would be the biggest disaster. Dear Members of the Parliament, once again, thank you very much for this encouraging debate. The last European Council adopted extremely important points on supporting Europe’s competitiveness. Nevertheless, the Green Deal is recognised that it ensures competitiveness of EU industry and increases Europe’s energy independence and resilience. So the Commission looks forward to continuing cooperation with the European Parliament and all its Members, both in this mandate and the new one to come, because we are committed to finding the best solution for European citizens and European businesses.