Mr. Paolo Gentiloni:

I think the Commission has shown the correct ambition on climate change. I know this will not be an easy task with member states, for perfectly understandable reasons. In some cases, member states are lagging behind in climate transition, so they need more support and they are facing higher costs for the transition. On the other hand, we have a real and justified concern about the possible social impact of this transition. The Commission is well aware of these two problems and the differences among member states. Some member states still rely heavily on carbon in their energy use, for example, and for them the transition will be more costly than for others. There is also the risk that some of the measures we propose as a Commission will have a social impact on electricity prices, the heating of houses or transport costs.

All these concerns are legitimate but the experience shows we cannot waste much time. Time is limited and ambition is inevitable. Let us consider what happened in recent years. The Commission made its proposal for a European Green Deal in January 2020. Then, in July, during the pandemic, we decided to increase the ambition of our proposal, and in particular to increase the target reduction of emissions from 40% to 50%. This decision, which was taken during the pandemic, could have been viewed as a little extreme, but in a few months we found we were lucky because of the results of the US presidential election, which led the US to return to the Paris Agreement. Before this, in the autumn, several countries had joined the EU in its target of carbon neutrality by 2050. The UN General Assembly was the occasion at which several countries announced their commitment to carbon neutrality by 2050.

One year after this, we can see that the EU ambition has been followed by other big global players. The proposals we tabled with the so-called Fit for 55 package will be very much discussed among member states but at the end of the day, we can change something, of course. We are completely open to changes. We need this kind of ambition, however. The alternative is very dangerous and the capacity of the Union to set standards in this kind of regulation is a form of leadership.

Let me mention two things connected with economic activity. First, we are issuing green bonds to finance our recovery and resilience plan, and we are setting standards here too. Our taxonomy on green bonds is very advanced and with these emissions, the European Commission will become the first issuer of green bonds in financial markets.

Second, we are proposing the carbon border adjustment mechanism, which will have a gradual introduction in our system and mirror our emission trade system for imports. Again, here we are seeing other big economic players in the world reacting and saying that they have taken note of this and that perhaps we can co-ordinate. Under the carbon club proposal that is on the table, different proposals could be co-ordinated. Again, we are open to co-ordination but we are not available to wait for our proposals. We will, therefore, table our proposals and we are ready to co-ordinate them with other players.

In conclusion, this Commission was able to play a leading role in this climate transition issue. Is this decisive? We have 7% of the global emissions so it could be not decisive. At the same time, however, we have a very big economic and trade influence in the world. If we are followed or if we co-ordinate other players in the same direction, therefore, we will say that we did the right thing, and I am sure that we did the right thing.