28 Amendments of Sara SKYTTEDAL related to 2020/2043(INI)
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Paris Agreement, the Green Deal and the goal of achieving climate neutrality by 2050; notes the lack of international climate effortssignificant divergence of climate efforts between different countries; underlines that EU climate policy must go hand in hand with increased economic growth and competitiveness for the European industry based on the principles of free and fair competition; believes that an EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (‘the mechanism’) cshould serve to incentivise international efforts to combat climate change, therefore asks the Commission to consider all available options while drawing up proposal for any such mechanism;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Paris Agreement, the Green Deal and the goal of achieving climate neutrality by 2050; notes the lack of international climate efforts; believes that an EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (‘the mechanism’) which is compatible with World Trade Organisation agreements could incentivise international efforts to combat climate change only in the absence of progress towards a global CO2 price;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The mechanism (climate tariffs) need to be compatible with World Trade Organisation agreements and, be non- discriminatory and be simple to administer, furthermore, they should also avoid weakening European companies export opportunities to third countries in the form of retaliatory actions;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines that international carbon pricing and fully competitive low-emission solutions would render the mechanism obsolete; stresses, therefore, that the EU needs to step up efforts in this respect; recalls that many technical solutions for mitigating CO2 are still at the pilot stage and far from being economically feasible; underlines that the Union’s increased climate ambition at the core of the Green Deal will increase the risk of carbon leakage in many industrial sectors;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Large parts of the world, especially system rivals, do not share the EU's ambitious environmental and climate agenda, therefore, demand for European solutions and European companies' competitiveness is eroded on the global market where certain companies and states have considerably lower environmental requirements than those in Europe;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. It is therefore in the interest of European companies to strengthen global environmental requirements, not only because that would be beneficial to companies but also because climate change is a global problem that requires global solutions, the EU should therefore continue to support the establishment of a global price for CO2 emission in line with Article 6 of the Paris Agreement;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Emphasises that a large port of the world’s state aid goes to activities that are damaging to the environmental which means that European companies face competition that is distorted and harmful to the environment, at the same time they face increasingly greater pressure to reduce their own negative environmental impacts, therefore, attempts to limit global state support will contribute towards improving the competitiveness of European companies and reducing emissions at the same time;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that decentralisedasymmetrical climate actions can lead to carbon leakage and a competitive disadvantage on international markets for the EU industry; urges the Commission, therefore, to ensure full carbon-leakage protection and to consider the inclusion ofinclude export rebates in the mechanism;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recalls that the EU’s climate policy and industrial policy must go hand in hand, to avoid carbon and investment leakage and protect jobs; stresses that any mechanism must be embedded into our industry strategy, creating an incentive for industries to produce clean and competitive products, and avoid carbon leakage, without endangering trade opportunities.
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Acknowledges that if the mechanism is designed and implemented as an import-ETS system, maintaining the existing free allowances would not amount to double protection, especially if importers are able to demonstrate that their imports are at least as efficient as the best in class;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Calls on the Commission not to replace existing carbon leakage measures with an untested mechanism which could create considerable uncertainties and risks for European industry, such as retaliatory measures;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Urges the Commission to coordinate with worldwide EU trading partners such as the US and Australia, whose governments have a different approaches to climate protection and could regards the mechanism as arbitrary and unjustified discrimination, recent trade conflicts with the US have demonstrated what conflict potential there is in unilateral customs tariffs, therefore, an unbalanced "climate tariff" should be very carefully weighed up against the risk of renewed trade disputes with allies and to avoid signalling protectionist measures;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Welcomes the announcement of the Chinese Communist Party’s intent to reach climate neutrality by 2060; welcomes this announcement as a success for continued climate diplomacy, furthermore, stresses the importance of climate diplomacy and rejects the notion of climate protectionism;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Suggests a progressive mechanism that first includes sectors with the highest risk of carbon leakage before being enlarged over time; stresses that this should not lead to internal market distortionHighlights the role such a mechanism could play, if balanced and appropriately implemented, in energy intensive industries, such as steel, cement and aluminium, given the experienced trade exposure of those sectors and their participation in the ETS; Suggests a progressive mechanism that first includes sectors with the highest risk of carbon leakage before being enlarged over time if deemed appropriate; considers it necessary that the scope of the mechanism covers as a large part of the carbon footprint of a product as possible, i.e. through the inclusion of emissions from energy in production; stresses that this should be done considering their respective value chains and not lead to internal market distortions notably on downstream markets; recalls that determining the carbon footprint of a product includes several insecurities and that the mechanism should not contribute to an undue regulatory burden for importing companies especially SMEs;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Suggests a progressive mechanism that first includes sectors with the highest risk of carbon leakage before being enlarged over time; stresses that this should not lead to internal market distortions; acknowledges however, that for many products it’s difficult to determine and verify a "product carbon footprint", this applies in particularly to complex technical products whose production and supply processes consist of multiple stages;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the need to limit international retaliation measures against the EU caused by the mechanism; urges the Commission to make the mechanism World Trade Organization-compatible ongly emphasises that the success of European SMEs and Hidden Champions depends on access to global markets. Therefore, calls on the Commission to base any legislative proposal on a thorough impact assessment, which takes into consideration the impact of possible counter measures taken by affected third countries against European industries Stresses the need to limit and possibly avoid international retaliation measures against the EU caused by the mechanism; urges the Commission to make the mechanism compatible with the WTO acquis and provisions in the Union’s free trade agreements and to take a multilateral approach to its design; underlines the need to deduct costs incurred from carbon taxes, emissions rights under cap-and- to take a multilateral approach to its desrade schemes or equivalent climate mitigation measures, including those of a regulatory rather than a fiscal nature, in the country of production from payments at import under the mechanism and to avoid any discrimination based on origin;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Expresses its deep concern over the erosion of the multilateral trading system and the effects from increased trade barriers and trade conflicts for the competitiveness of the EU industry; stresses that the introduction of a mechanism must not contribute to an increased insecurity in this regard; recognises that in order for the European industry to be competitive, it needs access to global supply chains for sourcing and further processing and to global markets; calls on the Commission to actively engage with trade partners’ governments to ensure a continued dialogue with trade partners’ governments on this initiative; Underlines that trade policy can and should be used to promote a positive environmental agenda and to avoid major differences in environmental ambition between the EU and the rest of the world, but this should be done in proportional and balanced ways, be evidence based and not be used as a cover for protectionism;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Supports unilateral environmental requirements on developing countries in exchange for market access as an alternative to linking EU tariff-free access in the General System of Preferences scheme not only to ratification and implementation of international environmental conventions but also directly to relevant initiatives in the EU Green Deal;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Emphasises that while the purpose of the mechanism must be to contribute to lower carbon emissions globally and limit carbon leakage, the design should contribute to a level playing field for the European industry both on European and in international markets in line with the Industry Strategy; highlights the need for specific attention to maintaining the availability of inputs in the supply chains and competitiveness of downstream manufacturing industries;
Amendment 77 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Calls on the Commission not to present a mechanism which undermines the Paris Agreement which allows the definition of CO2 reduction targets to be tailored to individual countries; if the mechanism presented by the Commission aims to balance out the various reduction paths of the individual countries by means of Carbon Border Adjustment, it may possibly undermine the Paris Agreement's approach
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Emphasises that the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) is and should remain the key market based instrument to cost-effectively reduce CO2 emissions this includes the system of free allowances; asks the Commission to consider any design options that allow the existing carbon leakage measures to co- exist with the mechanism while not leading to double protection; therefore takes the view that the mechanism should co-exist together with the free allocation of allowances for certain sectors; the phasing out of existing carbon leakage measures could cause a loss of competitiveness of companies in the single market and globally; stresses the need for equally effective measures if existing measures are to be phased out.
Amendment 90 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that the resources incurred by the mechanism are to be considered EU own resources; is convinced that these resources must be used for climate measuresmust not create distortions based on the Member State of import but help level the global playing field between competing industries and for low carbon investment and industrial manufacturing transformation;
Amendment 96 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that the resources incurred by the mechanism are to be considered EU ownMember State resources; is convinced that these resources must be used for climate measures;
Amendment 97 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Underlines that the CO2 content of imported products would need to be reliably and precisely determined, inter alia through independent third party verification and if such cannot be provided relevant average data; stresses the need for the mechanism to cover both direct and indirect carbon emissions; reiterates the need for adequate anti- circumvention mechanisms; stresses nevertheless that the mechanism should not lead to excessive administrative burden, especially for small- and medium- sized enterprises.
Amendment 105 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to conduct an in-depth impact assessment of different mechanisms and designsalternatives before presenting a legislative proposal; including regulatory climate standards for imported products and the compatibility with EU ETS’s free allocation of allowances, to incentivise international climate action and prevent carbon leakage before presenting a legislative proposal.
Amendment 111 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the Commission to intensify its efforts for global CO2 pricing and facilitating trade in climate and environmental protection technologies for instance through trade policy initiatives such as the WTO Environmental Goods Agreement; stresses that the Union can play a pioneering role with ambitious energy and sustainability chapters in its trade agreements.
Amendment 114 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Acknowledges that the mechanism is in principle trade restrictive, the impact assessment should look into the ease with which the mechanism could be adjusted or removed once breakthrough technologies reach global marketability, global climate ambitions are converged or when retaliation occurs;
Amendment 116 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Calls on the Commission to also consider alternative measures and to thoroughly demonstrate the added value of a carbon border adjustment mechanism; considers that a digital product passport, well designed and synchronised with existing systems, business standardisation bodies and global standards could help in this process; in the post-COVID-19 economy, carbon prices may prove to be too unstable to support effective industrial decarbonisation; therefore, there is a need for product policies to push forward new standards on low-carbon, resource- efficient products to secure the transition to a sustainable economy.