mr president let me thank you on behalf of the commission for the chance to discuss the outcome of the copenhagen conference on climate change and the follow-up to the copenhagen accord
my colleague stavros dimas has asked me to apologise on his behalf for not being able to be here himself because he is ill which is particularly regrettable as this would probably have been his last plenary appearance
i volunteered to substitute for stavros in this very important debate
i want to express our appreciation for the active and supportive role the european parliament played before the conference and at the conference itself
the contacts with your delegation throughout the conference proved most useful
in particular you have played a crucial role in order to enhance our outreach with key players in other countries and other regions
i believe we share the view that the result of copenhagen falls badly short of our goal of an ambitious and legally binding agreement which would be necessary to limit climate change to below two c this is extremely disappointing for all of us who have fought for years and years for concrete policy decisions to reverse climate change
the reasons for the failure were many and i will come back to them in a moment
still one may also conclude that the accord is better than no outcome at all which would have been the worst-case scenario
on the one hand to find something positive the copenhagen accord at least recognises the need to limit climate change to below two c it also invites the developed countries to list economy-wide emission targets by thirty-one january twenty ten and calls for the developing countries to list mitigation actions by the same date
furthermore the accord sets the basis for a rather substantial financial package of usd thirty billion for the coming three years and recognises the need for usd one hundred billion annually by twenty twenty
on the other hand the accord has serious weaknesses
it contains no reference to mid-term or long-term mitigation targets
the reduction pledges announced so far are not sufficient to stay within the target of two c there is unfortunately in my view little cause for optimism that we will see improved offers by thirty-one january rather the opposite
last but certainly not least the accord is not legally binding and perhaps even more worrying it does not provide for the conclusion of a legally binding agreement this year which was one of our key goals
looking ahead the next step will be to ensure that this accord will at least become operational and will pave the way for a new climate treaty which must be agreed on urgently in the course of this year
as a very first step it will be crucial to ensure that all key parties now endorse the accord and notify their targets or actions by thirty-one january
adequate financing also needs to be provided
in this respect we need to explore ways of setting up a copenhagen green climate fund
we must also strengthen alliances with countries and regions who share our vision of a successful outcome in the international climate negotiations
to conclude we have huge challenges before us to ensure unity at the european level to engage strategically with key external partners and to maintain our full commitment to multilateral climate action but there are many lessons to be learned from cop fifteen
one striking lesson certainly is that we must learn to speak with one voice
in copenhagen china india the united states and other major powers each spoke with one voice while europe spoke with many different voices
the same goes for global economic governance and international security
we are indeed at a crossroads today
either we take determined and united action for europe's ecological economic and political revival or we risk economic stagnation and political irrelevance
let us take copenhagen as an alarming warning of that scenario
we must do better than that and we can do
only by standing united can we succeed and i look forward to working with you to achieve this objective
