- The adoption of Council conclusions on a recent assessment by the European Commission on the implications for the EU of increasing its target to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
- Discussions on a long-standing request by EU member states to the Commission to properly implement requirements on genetically modified (GM) crops.
CLIMATE TARGET
The European Commission found in its assessment that the cost of implementing the EU's existing climate and energy targets are significantly lower than predicted in 2008. The Commission also said that increasing the EU's greenhouse gas emission reduction target from 20% to 30% would produce €40 billion annual savings in gas and oil imports and create hundreds of thousands of jobs.
An upgrade to a 30% target could even help EU member states tackle their budget deficits. Moving to a 30% target would provide EU countries with total additional income of about €70 billion, according to Greenpeace calculations. This would be generated by higher auctioning revenues from the EU's emissions trading system. These funds could help mend Europe's broken public finances while making the economy more efficient, more competitive and more resilient to fluctuating energy prices.
EU leaders meeting next week on 17-18 June are also expected to discuss the Commission findings, while Environment ministers are this week likely to ask the Commission to develop an analysis of the costs and benefits of higher climate targets for individual EU member states. The issue is expected to be back on the agenda of EU summits taking place after the summer.
Greenpeace EU climate policy director Joris den Blanken said: "The EU is starting to fall behind China and the US in the race towards renewables and energy efficiency. A higher climate target would generate billions in auctioning revenues from Europe's carbon market. A 30% target would spur green development and even help governments put their finances in order."
GM CROP ASSESSMENTS
In December 2008, EU member states unanimously called on the Commission and its food safety authority (EFSA) to improve the assessment of the risks associated with GM crops, such as long-term environmental impacts, effects of herbicide use related to GMOs and economic impacts on farmers. EU countries argued that requirements under EU law are not being properly implemented, but the Commission has so far failed to act.
Instead, it recently authorised the first GM crop for cultivation in Europe in 12 years: a controversial antibiotic-resistant GM potato. In an attempt to deflect some of the criticism that ensued, the Commission is expected to put forward a new plan next month that would give EU countries and regions the right to ban GM crops on their territory. But this proposal does nothing to answer the concerns of member states on the scientific assessment of the risks of GM crops.
Greenpeace EU agriculture policy adviser Stefanie Hundsdorfer said: "The right for European countries and regions to ban GM crops should not come at the expense of proper scientific assessment at EU level. No country exists in isolation, as a recent case of GM contamination in Germany has proved. Whether it likes it or not, the Commission has a duty to properly verify the risks of GM crops on our health and the environment. Until this is done, no GM crop should be allowed in Europe."
Ends
Contacts:
Joris den Blanken - Greenpeace EU climate and energy policy director:
+32 (0)476 96 13 75 (mob), 
Stefanie Hundsdorfer - Greenpeace EU agriculture policy adviser:
+32 (0)496 161 582 (mobile), 
Mark Breddy - Greenpeace EU communications manager: +32 (0)496 156229 (mobile), 