Environment Council Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateCaroline Spelman
Main Page: Caroline Spelman (Conservative - Meriden)Department Debates - View all Caroline Spelman's debates with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
(12 years, 10 months ago)
Written StatementsI represented the UK at the Environment Council in Brussels on 19 December. Stewart Stevenson, Scottish Minister for Environment and Climate Change, also joined the delegation.
Following lengthy debate, the Council adopted conclusions on implementation of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020. I indicated the need for speedy implementation, and highlighted the UK’s own national biodiversity strategy. I also emphasised the importance of fully implementing the resource mobilisation strategy. In relation to CAP, I reiterated our view that the best way to help the environment was through targeted measures under pillar 2: environment outcomes are most cost-effectively delivered by longer-term, targeted interventions.
Ministers also adopted conclusions on the resource efficiency road map. The Commission underlined the importance of this agenda for the future of the European economy. I brought attention to significant savings we have identified UK businesses could make via increased resource efficiency, and stressed the importance of this agenda in making the transition to a “green” economy, not just in the EU, but also globally in the context of Rio plus 20. I also highlighted that businesses were leading the drive towards more efficient resource use and it was important to draw on their expertise.
The presidency informed the Council of progress made on: the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on control of major accident hazards involving dangerous substances (“Seveso III” directive); the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the export and import of hazardous chemicals (PIC); and the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 1999/32/EC as regards the sulphur content of marine fuels. On the latter, I supported the elements of the Commission’s proposal that aligned it with the relevant 2008 International Maritime Organisation agreement, as it would provide much-needed certainty for industry and would deliver significant environmental benefits. However, I also emphasised that the economic impact on the industry must be minimised.
After lunch, over which Ministers continued to discuss the importance of resource efficiency, there was an exchange of views on the result of the 17th conference of the parties (COP 17) to the United Nations framework convention on climate change (UNFCCC) in Durban. Most member states agreed that the result was an important step forward, and that the EU’s speaking with one voice, with a clear position, and in coalition with the least developed countries and small island states, were key factors that contributed to the success of the conference, and elements which should be built upon in future. Many member states noted, however, that there are still significant challenges to be overcome in the coming months, such as defining the EU’s emission reduction target, the length of the second commitment period of the Kyoto protocol, and how to tackle the issue of surplus assigned amount units. I made the case that further progress depended on the EU’s leadership, and to this end I made the case that an EU emissions reduction target of 30% (compared to 1990 levels) was the right place to be in 2020.