5 Amendments of Arnaud DANJEAN related to 2020/2043(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Is convinced that a purpose-built trade policy can be an important driver in steering economies towards decarbonisation in order to achieve the climate objectives set in the Paris Agreement and the European Green Deal; emphasises that, as a result of the EU’s increased ambition on climate change, risk of carbon leakage increased consequently; urges the Commission to ensure full carbon-leakage protection in all its policies accordingly; stresses that EU climate policy must be aligned to economic growth and competitiveness for the European industry and SMEs;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 1 – point 1 (new)
(1) Is convinced that the main objective of a carbon border adjustment mechanism should be to reduce global emissions, while avoiding carbon leakage and upholding competitiveness of European industries.
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Supports, in the absence of a global carbon price and a multilateral solution, a market-based EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM), with regard to imports from all countries not covered by a strict carbon trading system with similar goals and costs for lowering CO2 emissions, on condition that it is compatible with EU free trade agreements (FTAs) and WTO rules (by being non- discriminatory and not constituting a disguised restriction on international trade), and that it is proportionate, based on the polluter pays principle and fit for purpose in delivering the climate objectives;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for thorough impact assessments andExpresses concern that a mechanism centred solely on basic materials could lead to a shift in imports towards intermediate and final products not covered by the mechanism, thereby affecting the EU industry; calls for thorough, proper and comprehensive impact assessments prior to its implementation also aimed to identify measures for sectors where the risk of carbon leakage is highest while taking into consideration the sector’s competitiveness and calls on the Commission for the utmost transparency of the process leading to the CBAM, as well as engagement with the EU’s trading partners to build coalitions and avoid any possible retaliations; calls on the Commission not to replace existing carbon leakage measures with an untested mechanism, in order to avoid major uncertainties and risks for European industry;
Amendment 80 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that many carbon- and trade- intensive industrial sectors could potentially be impacted by the CBAM, either directly or indirectly, and that it could influence supply chains; emphasises therefore, that any CBAM design should be an additional and complementary measure to existing carbon leakage measures, at least in an initial phase, in order to better monitor the cost effect and to safeguard the global level of competitiveness of the EU industrial sectors vis a vis competition from third countries with non-equivalent CO2 reduction and cost reduction goals; stresses that any CBAM should be easy to administer and not place an undue burden on enterprises, especially small and medium- sized enterprises (SMEs); notes that from a bureaucratic and implementation cost point of view, the CBAM should not be a complicated alternative to the instruments already in use.