VIENNA (PK) – To achieve climate neutrality in the EU by 2050, a Union-wide climate target must be set for 2040. The communication published by the European Commission on this issue was on the agenda of the EU Committee of the Bundesrat today. The FPÖ submitted a request for a report and called for a “reform of the EU recovery law”. With the votes of the ÖVP and the Greens, the agenda was then postponed and with it the vote on the FPÖ motion.
EU climate target by 2040: FPÖ applies to “modify rehabilitation law”.
According to a report released by the European Commission in February, by 2023, climate change will increase faster than ever before. Based on a comprehensive impact assessment, the Commission recommends a target of reducing net greenhouse gases by 90% by 2040 compared to 1990 to be on track for climate neutrality by 2050. The impact assessment shows that the -80% target by 2040 is incompatible with the 1.5 degree target of the Paris Climate Agreement. An expert from the Ministry of Climate Protection briefed the committee that this is not a legislative proposal, but proposals to incorporate the 2040 target into law are expected from the new commission in early 2025, the expert said. .
Austria has not yet announced a position on the level of the proposed 2040 target, but – as planned in the government plan – wants to position itself as an “ambitious and reliable partner in the group of climate protection pioneers”, according to the climate ministry. . However, the Commission’s communication of the importance of nuclear energy in achieving climate targets has been viewed critically. From the Austrian perspective, the Ministry of Climate Protection insists that using nuclear power is not a “practical, safe or cost-effective option” to combat the climate crisis.
Federal Councilor Elisabeth Grossmann (SPÖ/St) said it was a “high priority” to submit the final version of the national energy and climate plan. If this does not happen, the threat of infringement proceedings will be “extremely costly” for Austria. A climate protection ministry expert there said the national plan was being “seriously discussed” and should be finalized “as quickly as possible”.
Regarding the climate targets set by the EU, Markus Leinfellner (FPÖ/St) has already expressed concerns about, among others, security of supply, competitiveness and security of location. Therefore, in this context, he submitted a report calling on President Carl Nehhammer to work at the European level to ensure domestic food sovereignty. Regarding climate protection minister Leonor Küssler’s voting behavior at European level, Leinfellner stressed that a member of the government cannot take decisions that “harm our farmers”.
Ferdinand Tiefnig (ÖVP/Ö) said he was surprised by his coalition partner. Because revitalization should not require the removal of flood defenses. He is grateful to Federal Chancellor Karl Nehhammer, the Farmers’ Union and Agriculture Minister Norbert Dotschnik for reacting “correctly and promptly” to Leonor Küsler’s voting behavior. According to Tiefnig, he may join the FPÖ on “many issues” in this matter.
A destroyed, dry planet is a very expensive planet, replied Marco Schreuder (Greens/W). Schröder spoke against the use of nuclear power in the Commission’s communication on the European climate target for 2040.
Clara Neurater (ÖVP/T) says that Chancellor Karl Nehammer is already committed to ensuring domestic food sovereignty at the European level. It is impossible to reverse the Revival Act. However, an action for annulment has already been filed with the ECJ, and the Belgian president was informed before the vote that climate protection minister Leonor Küssler (Greens) had approved the EU restructuring as illegal. Neurater said there was already “a lot going on” and submitted a motion to postpone the agenda.
Marco Schreuder (Greens/W) agreed to the adjournment, but not the reasons for the adjournment.
Markus Leinfellner (FPÖ/St) said he could not understand the reason for the postponement.
This irony manifests itself as ridicule at the European level, criticized Dominik Reisinger (SPÖ/O). The agenda item was set by the ruling parties, so it would be “absolutely ridiculous” if they postponed it now, Risinger said.
The ÖVP and the Greens voted to postpone the agenda. The motion submitted by the FPÖ is therefore considered “postponed” and therefore not put to a vote. (Continuation of the European Union Committee of the Federal Council) B
