Latest news with #GreenDeal
Euronews
a day ago
- Politics
- Euronews
Lead MEP says EU should skip 2040 emissions targets
The EU's 2040 emission reduction target is 'simply not necessary' and should be rejected, the Czech MEP responsible for steering the proposal through the Parliament has told Euronews in an interview. Ondrej Knotek is a member of the far-right Patriots for Europe (PfE) group and was appointed as rapporteur to steer through the Parliament a Climate Law amendment setting the 2040 goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The European Commission formally proposed a 90% carbon emissions reduction target by 2040 in an amendment to its Climate Law earlier in July, as a pathway to achieving zero emissions by 2050. Knotek said that when drafting the Parliament's position on the file in the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety (ENVI), he will push to reject the Commission's proposal entirely, without proposing any alternative emissions reduction target. 'The 2040 target is an addition to the two existing targets, that is simply not necessary,' he said, referring to the EU's final goal of reaching climate neutrality by 2050 and the intermediate target of a 55% reduction by 2030. Knotek believes the EU has already done much more than its global competitors to combat global warming, and argues that the risks for the European economy and citizens are 'much higher' than the potential contributions to global climate change mitigation. 'Let's wait for the others to have the same two legally binding targets, let's wait for the others to have this third target, and then we can accompany. No one says that Europe needs to be the flagship,' he said. Beyond the 2040 target, Knotek also challenges the entire Green Deal, the EU's long-term plan to reach climate neutrality by 2050. 'The target as such looked realistic in 2020, but now, after five years, we know that very probably it is not so much realistic,' he said, calling for a 'strong recalibration' of the EU's commitments. 'The correct reaction to the climate change is to reduce the emissions in a sustainable, and even slow way [...] We don't have to invest into faster reduction of emissions, but into the so-called adaptation to the climate change. The role of adaptation should be much higher than the reduction of greenhouse gases.' A clash foreseen on the Climate Law Ondrej Knotek will be supported by his political group, PfE, which strongly opposes EU climate action, and likely by other right-wing parties in Parliament. But dismantling this signature EU climate policy will not be an easy task. Knotek's appointment, which results from a complex allotment system giving large groups control over important files, has already triggered backlash from leftist and centrist members of Parliament. Socialists and Democrats, Renew Europe, the Greens/EFA, and The Left will advocate for maintaining the 2040 target. Therefore, the Parliament's position on the file will depend on the choice of the largest group, the European People's Party (EPP). 'EPP MEPs are split on this issue. I am convinced that if they are left to vote freely, the majority of them would be against the 2040 target,' Knotek said. The Czech MEP believes his EPP colleagues will follow the direction of their leader, Manfred Weber. 'In the EPP, if you do not follow the line, you are sidelined and do not get any missions. So, if there would be a secret vote, they could distract, otherwise they stick to the line.' Knotek's report will be voted in the ENVI committee on September 23. Others MEPs from the same committee have until September 8 to add amendments. Parliament's plenary session has then to confirm the outcome in the second week of October. After the vote in Parliament, however, the provision must be negotiated with the EU's 27 member states, which are set to adopt a common position in the Council. Some including France and Poland have already expressed scepticism about the proposal. The timing of negotiations is sensitive, as the Commission hoped to have the 2040 target enshrined in law ahead of the COP30 international climate conference in Brazil, which takes place in November.
IOL News
5 days ago
- Business
- IOL News
South Africa's proactive approach to finding new trade partners as US tariffs loom
Agriculture Minister John Steenhuisen says the country was working on minimising the impact of the looming US 30% tariff hike on its exports. Image: Henk Kruger / Independent Newspapers South Africa is quickly expanding its global trade partners as a solution to the United States of America's 30% tariff on its exports, said Agriculture Minister John Steenhuisen. Steenhuisen made the statement as the US tariff increase on South Africa is expected to come into effect on August 1. 'The real solution lies not just in playing defence, but in going on the offensive. This is why we are doubling down on market access expansion,' said Steenhuisen, who is the leader of the DA in the Government of National Unity. The tariff deadline will come as the country waits for the outcome of the proposed US-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act of 2025, which seeks to impose sanctions against some ANC leaders accused of, among others, supporting China, Russia, and Iran, and mismanaging state resources. Delivering a keynote address at the RSA Group Stakeholder Dinner in Muldersdrift outside Johannesburg on Thursday, Steenhuisen said his department was reaching out to other countries looking for markets to sell the country's agricultural products. He called on the country not to waste time by being overly reliant, but to be productive. He said the country was already strengthening its trade alliances with the likes of Chile, Peru, and New Zealand 'to jointly lobby for fair and stable trade treatment of fresh produce' through the Southern Hemisphere Association of Fresh Fruit Exporters. 'Over the past six months alone, we have finalised new phytosanitary protocols for the export of avocados to China; table grapes to Vietnam and the Philippines; and maize to India,' he said. Steenhuisen said there were trade negotiations with Indonesia, Thailand, and Bangladesh. 'Our goal is simple — to ensure that no South African fruit producer is ever left dependent on the goodwill of a single trading partner.' He said the country was also strengthening its plant health systems, expanding traceability capabilities, and digitising its export certification platforms to align with the European Union's Green Deal and Asia's growing demand for sustainability-linked imports as part of 'investments that are not just defensive; they are the launchpad for new growth'. He said the country's agriculture has always been one of ingenuity, grit, and partnership. 'We have overcome political transitions, trade embargoes, droughts, pandemics, and port crises. We will overcome these current headwinds (tariff increase) too,' he said. Steenhuisen said that to avert the effects of new tariffs more quickly and effectively, the country must be united and pull together. 'My department is open for business, open for reform, and open for ideas,' he said. Steenhuisen said the tariffs will damage the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), which is set to expire in September and is already under threat of not being renewed due to strained relations between South Africa and the US. 'Let me be clear: South African agriculture did not deserve this treatment. We do not dump, we do not distort, and we do not play geopolitical games with food,' he said. He said the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition (DTIC) was leading the country's formal engagement with the United States. 'And we continue to work hand in hand with Minister Tau and his team to ensure that the full impact on the agricultural sector is well understood,' he said. Soon after taking over the US presidency for the second time, Donald Trump came down heavy on South Africa by signing an Executive Order alleging that the country was mistreating its Afrikaner community by enabling genocide and passing oppressive policies. He also accused the country of being aggressive towards his country and its allies, 'including accusing Israel, not Hamas, of genocide in the International Court of Justice, and reinvigorating its relations with Iran to develop commercial, military, and nuclear arrangements'. 'The United States cannot support the government of South Africa's commission of rights violations in its country or its undermining of United States foreign policy, which poses national security threats to our Nation, our allies, our African partners, and our interests,' read the order. In reaction, Ramaphosa led a delegation, which comprised Steenhuisen and influential businessman Johann Rupert, to correct misinformation about Afrikaners' treatment and straighten the relationship with Trump's administration. However, the first phase of passing the US-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act of 2025, which, according to its author, US Congressman Ronny Jackson, seeks to punish ANC leaders, raised eyebrows. The act, which is now awaiting tabling at the full House of Representatives, accused the ANC's government leaders of undermining human rights by having a military and political relationship with the Russian government, which is at war with Ukraine. It accused the country of having allowed a US-sanctioned Russian cargo ship, the Lady R, to dock and transfer arms at a South African naval base in December 2022. 'The ANC published an article in their newspaper, ANC Today, in October 2024, promoting Russian propaganda about the war in Ukraine,' read the proposed act, which also accused ANC leaders of mismanaging Eskom and Transnet, and enabling the cholera outbreaks. University of South Africa's Thabo Mbeki African School of Public and International Affairs' international affairs expert, Dr Bongiwe Ngcobo, said the US actions were designed to force South Africa to abandon the International Court of Justice case against Israel on the Gaza conflict. She said South Africa's BRICS membership was also a concern for the US. 'If BRICS strengthen and grow, then it means they will have a challenger, and it means they will have less control over smaller countries like South Africa and other countries from the Global South,' she said. [email protected]
Euractiv
23-07-2025
- Business
- Euractiv
EU begins ‘simplification' of environmental law
A widely expected addition to the European Commission's series of 'omnibus' proposals to ease the administrative burden on EU companies was launched on Tuesday with a call for 'feedback on the simplification of future environmental legislation'. As it opened its initial public consultation , the EU executive published an outline of its plans, hinting at some areas of environmental legislation that 'may' be up for amendment in the latest round of deregulation. To help 'rationalise' reporting obligations, the Commission suggests scrapping the substances of concern in products (SCIP) database under the Waste Framework Directive. The law requires suppliers to notify the European Chemicals Agency of any products containing chemicals on the EU candidate list for prohibition at concentrations of over 0.1%. The EU executive also promises a review of some aspects of extended producer responsibility (EPR) rules – a contentious area where chemicals and pharmaceutical companies are currently fighting against the obligation to pay for the removal of product residues from sewage. The upcoming environmental omnibus might also target the EU's Nature Directives, which pre-date the Green Deal of the first von der Leyen Commission and have been judged by NGOs, the European Environment Agency and the Commission itself to be fit-for-purpose but badly implemented. This, at least, is one interpretation of the Commission's suggestion that the red tape-cutting package of amendments to EU laws could include 'addressing permitting challenges relating to environmental assessment'. The call for evidence runs until midnight on 10 September, and a legislative proposal is indicated for the fourth quarter of 2025. (rh)
Euractiv
23-07-2025
- Business
- Euractiv
Czech industries urge PM to pushback on EU climate rules
Six Czech industry associations have called on Prime Minister Petr Fiala to defend energy-intensive sectors in EU climate talks, warning that Green Deal targets could cripple key sectors. In a joint letter on Tuesday, the groups argued that soaring energy prices, which they linked to EU climate policy, have already stalled major decarbonisation projects, including those at Třinecké železárny, Lovochemie, and Orlen Unipetrol. 'It simply doesn't add up economically,' the letter states, warning that most cost pressures will drive companies out of the market. To avoid what they describe as a wave of industrial decline, the associations demanded urgent national measures, including a zero tax rate on gas, lower network charges for electricity and gas, as well as temporary state aid for industrial users if prices remain high beyond 2025. The group also wants the government to defend free allowances under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), despite the launch of the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), and to expand compensation for indirect emissions costs to cover strategic chemicals In calling for the release of a long-delayed expert report on national energy strategy, which remains withheld by the finance ministry, the associations also criticised the government for its lack of transparency. 'We want to know what the energy situation is, how it will be solved, and how much it will cost,' wrote the signatories, who represent Czech steelmakers, chemical producers, forging companies, foundries, engineering firms and paper mills. (cs, de)
Malaysian Reserve
18-07-2025
- Business
- Malaysian Reserve
What the EU stands to lose as the continent bakes
AS MUCH of Europe bakes in a heatwave — which has led to power cuts, deaths and wildfires — you'd think that the case for ambitious emissions cuts would be easy to make. Not quite. The European Commission's 2040 climate target has stuck to its climate change advisory board's recommendation of a 90% decline in greenhouse gas emissions compared to 1990 levels, which is welcome. But, under pressure from member states including Poland, Italy and France, it was only able to make that politically palatable with the addition of what the commission is calling 'flexibilities' and critics are calling 'loopholes'. It's a clear sign that the geopolitical context — and the European Union's (EU) approach to the environment — has changed. The proposal allows for the use of international carbon credits — typically purchased from poorer, more vulnerable countries — to make up 3% of emissions reductions from 2036 onward. In other words, it enables the EU to outsource climate action, and it's the first time the bloc has set a climate target in which sectors not covered by carbon pricing aren't wholly dependent on domestic progress. There are reasonable arguments for including the caveat. In theory, it could serve as a mechanism to funnel funds into countries that find it hard to access essential climate finance. Some nations are already doing it: Switzerland bought carbon offsets that funded the rollout of electric buses in Thailand. It's cheaper to electrify public transport in Bangkok than it is in Bern, but on paper the emissions reductions are the same, so why not? The problem is that offsets have a long history of not doing what they claim to. Critics, including the EU's own scientific advisory board, argue that it could 'undermine' efforts to reduce emissions in richer countries. To maintain the integrity of the EU's progress on emissions, the allowance needs to come with some strict rules regarding quality and the types of activities that qualify — and a way to properly enforce those standards. Despite the controversy, it's unlikely that a big fight will happen over the proposal, which is the result of intensive consultations behind the scenes. The EU needs to get this tidied away so it can inform the 2035 nationally determined contribution (NDC) required by the United Nations (UN), which is already months overdue. To have any sway at the next climate conference in Brazil, the NDC needs to be submitted by September. The real battle of wills will likely focus on the simplification agenda striking a number of key green regulations, including reporting rules, agriculture and finance. These so-called omnibus packages are part of a broader pattern of backtracking on European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen's flagship Green Deal introduced in 2019. Between wolves getting their protection status downgraded, delays to anti-deforestation regulation and electric vehicle (EV) targets and attacks on the nature restoration law, it's hard to shake the feeling that the EU is losing its grip on climate leadership. The pressure to dilute green ambitions stems from the rise of right-wing populist politicians across the bloc. Even French President Emmanuel Macron, once a staunch defender of climate action on the world stage, has allowed multiple environmental policies to collapse in France including the introduction of low-emission zones. He was one of the voices pushing to delay agreement on the 2040 target, arguing that it has to be 'compatible with our competitiveness'. The Green Deal was introduced to a continent unshaken by a pandemic and war, so in some ways it's understandable that defence and enterprise have grown in importance. But backtracking comes with its own costs for businesses. On July 1, a joint letter was published urging the EU to preserve its sustainable finance plans. Signed by more than 150 businesses and investors, including French energy multinational EDF SA, global insurer and asset manager Allianz SE and France's La Banque Postale Asset Management, the statement said that sustainability rules are 'conducive to competitiveness and growth, as well as long-term value creation and subsequent returns for investors'. What Europeans need more than anything is a clear and stable environment so they can plan for the future. The omnibus initiatives can help that by providing clarity where the laws are currently confusing. But it would be a big mistake to dilute the EU's green ambition any more than it already has. — Bloomberg This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners. This article first appeared in The Malaysian Reserve weekly print edition
