EU-Logos

July 2019, four citizens’
initiatives are on the news. Three of them have been registered and the last
one has been refused. Since the citizens’ initiative system has been
simplified, this tool of transnational direct democracy is more and more
relevant. The protection of the environment is the main topic tackled by these
citizens’ initiatives. In July 2020, whether the initiatives succeed in
collecting at least one million signatures in seven different member states of
the European Union (EU), the European Commission will translate them into proposition
of regulation.

The citizens’ initiative is the first transnational tool of direct
democracy that allows the EU’s citizens to take part in the building of new
public policies in the EU. Often criticized for its lack of efficiency, this
system has recently been simplified. For example, the Commission can register
just one specific part of an initiative if some elements do not enter its
prerogatives. Indeed, before 2018, numerous initiatives were refused because
some of their elements were not part of the Commission’s competences, despite
the fact that the essential part was receivable. Now, the Commission has to
make sure every initiatives are translated in each of the EU’s languages and
gets one year to collect one million signatures in at least seven different
member states.[1] This
instrument -considered as irrelevant for years- is increasingly popular since
its simplification. The number of citizens’ initiatives increased by 30%
between the last two European Commissions and the rate of initiatives being
refused decreased by 80% on the same period.

A tax on carbon to fight global
warming.

The first initiative: “price for carbon emission, fighting global
warming” uses the example of the yellow jackets to illustrate the next two big
issues in the EU: policies designed to reduce fossil energies’ consumption and
to fight climate change on the one hand, and policies to reduce fiscal pressure
on the poorest part of workers and small companies on the other hand. The idea
is to build a sustainable production system by coupling environmental policies
with social ones. This measure would be coherent with the Paris agreements of
2015.

A tax on carbon would be a good incentive to push consumers and
producers to choose renewable energies and could help finance the cost for a
transition toward a cleaner production. Indeed, carbon emissions are known to
be responsible for climate change. The GIEC’s scientists also support this
version, which benefits from a large scientific consensus. An increase in the
price of fossil fuels would ultimately lead to a decrease in their consumption
and, therefore, to a decrease in carbon emissions.[2]

The benefit of such a tax could also be used to reduce the fiscal
pressure on poor workers or the cost of labour force for small businesses. The idea is to reduce the cost
of energical transition for poor families. In this perspective, the money
raised from the taxes would be spent to the benefit of the poorest part of the
population to compensate a costly energical transition.

In 1992, while the Rio summit
was suggesting the adoption of a carbon tax on each fuel barrels, the European
Council went against the Commission’s proposition. Instead of a tax targeting
directly carbon emissions, the system of quota on carbon emission has been adopted.
The aim was to create a market where the biggest companies would have to pay
for the right to pollute. This system has been heavily criticized, because of
its tendency to favour speculation and for its lack of efficiency. Another
substantial problem was that the system only concerned a limited number of
sectors. Only 55% of carbon emissions were included in that ‘pollution permit’.
For instance, the sector of transportation (responsible for about ¼ of carbon
emissions in the world), the agriculture sector, medium size businesses and the
domestic emissions were not included in the current system.[3]

A good solution would be to
implement a proportionality between the amount of carbon in a fuel barrel and
the tax that would be applied. There is of course a necessity to apply this tax
to every product that has been produced inside as well as outside of the EU,
taking in consideration the amount of carbon emissions generated in the process
of its production. This tax would avoid a decrease in European competitivity on
its own market and third countries would be pushed to adopt similar measures.

The session for signatures will
be open on July the 22nd of 2019.

A better regulation for GMOs.

The second initiative accepted
by the Commission argues that the regulation over Genetically Modified
Organisms (GMO) must be reformed if we want to keep it efficient. This
initiative is motivated by some concerns on consumer’s safety and environmental
risk. The text of the citizens’ initiative specifies that “GMOs are the result
of artificially altering the genetic material (a.k.a. DNA) of a living cell.
The resulting plant or animal carries DNA that it could not have obtained by
natural means. Naturally, DNA can only be altered during reproduction or
through random mutations that switch off genes or create new ones. GMOs contain
DNA that comes from species with which the original organism could not have
reproduced”.[4]

This technology is often used
for positive purposes and is essential in building a sustainable agriculture in
the future. The aim of crafting new plants which are more productive, or which
need less water or chemicals, suits perfectly with the imperatives of
environment preservation.

However, the dark side of the
coin is that very little is known about the potential harmful side effects on
both consumers and the environment, especially concerning the GMO’s produced
with unconventional and new techniques. According to the precautionary
principle, the products involving an important part of uncertainty are not
allowed on the European market. On the contrary, the crops produced with
conventional mutagenesis techniques have been considered safe for 50 years, but
are now starting to show their limits. Indeed, the conventional processes are
long, often too expensive and also contain a risk for unwanted side effects .
Nowadays, New Plant Breeding Techniques (NPBTs) are seen as more efficient and
more accurate than conventional mutagenesis. Despite the relative scientific
consensus about the benefits of NPBT, crops produced with NPBT are not allowed
within the European market because of the precautionary principle and to avoid
the sale of genetically modified products.

This prohibition is seen as
counterproductive by numerous scientists who think that a regulation would be
more adapted. The claim of this citizens’ initiative is that it would be more
appropriate to base the prohibition on the product itself rather than on the
technique that has been used in production. Such a new regulation would
conciliate safety and scientific progresses. The signature session will be open
on July the 25th.

The ending of the plastic era in Europe.

The initiative : “To put an end
to plastic era in Europe” is based on the assumption that plastic is a cheap
material chosen by producers for economic criterias without consideration for
the high environmental cost of its production. In a time of deep environmental
crisis, a shift in our behaviour is necessary and Europe could be a pioneer in
environmental policies. The use of renewable materials such as glass instead of
plastic could be an opportunity to drastically reduce pollution but also to
develop new jobs and consumers habits. The aim here is to expand the
legislation on the consumption of single-use plastic with plastic bottles as a
main product to be replaced. Ultimately, the objective is to totally abandon
single-use plastic in the EU.

This initiative is said to be an
opportunity to compile democracy and ecology in the EU.  The Union gathers only 7% of the world
population but is however consuming 20% of the earth’s biocapacity. Earth
Overshoot day, the day of the year on which humanity has consumed the
equivalent of the annual earth renewing capacites, is reached every year
earlier. This year -2019-, that point was reached in May. In front of the
emergency, the reaction seems to be too slow or inadapted, with a lack of
serious concern for the issue. In this context, it appears as a necessity to
adapt our production system to the limited resources we have.

This citizens’ initiative is
even more welcomed since the production of plastic bottle continues to rise
while the proportion of recycled trash is collapsing. There is another concern:  consumer’s safety. Indeed, at a certain time
of its lifespan, a plastic container is rejecting dangerous chemicals.
Moreover, the process of production can be dangerous for both the environment
and the workforce of other continents where the plastic is produced.

Recycling is not enough. All
plastic are not always recyclable, and even when they are, the process of
recycling is often of bad quality and generates carbon emissions as well.

The abandon of single-use
plastic production should be coupled with local production and short circuits
consumption. Returnable bottles associated with a deposit could also be part of
the solution. Reusable packaging would ultimately bring the producers to be
closer to the consumer and, by doing so, would create new jobs in the EU.

This initiative would be the
opportunity to go a step further in the transition and force the Member States
to comply with their engagement in the Paris agreements. It also considers the
transition toward a better and greater ecological production as a way to create
new jobs and economic opportunities[5].

The initiative will start
collecting signatures on the 26th of July.

The three initiatives have been
accepted as they were receivable in front of the Commission. A fourth
initiative named ‘Right in the EU, rights for minorities and democratization of
spanish political institutions’ has been rejected. In fact, this initiative was
nothing of a juridic proposition and was judged outside of the Commission’s
competences. For the three others, the result will be known by July 2020.

Baptiste
Richard.


For more information:

A price for carbon
emission:  http://stopglobalwarming.eu/

The end of plastic era in EU: https://www.guillaumebalas.eu/2019/05/23/pour-une-ecologie-de-rupture-commencons-par-mettre-fin-a-lere-du-plastique-en-europe/ New rule for GMO’s: https://www.growscientificprogress.org/


[1] Agence Belga : L’Europe veut faciliter le lancement des initiatives citoyennes,
RTL Info, Décembre 2018.

[2] Un prix
sur le Carbone : Combattre le changement climatique et augmenter l’emploi en
réduisant les impôts sur le travail

stopglobalwarming.eu, 2019.

[3] 
Deluzarche.C, Transport et CO2,
quelle part des émissions ?
, Futura planet, 2017.

[4] The
citizens’ initiative,
Crow Scientific progress, 2019.

[5] Balas.G : Pour
une écologie de rupture, commençons par mettre fin à l’ère du plastique en
Europe
. guillaumebalas.eu

L’article July 2019: three new citizens’ initiatives open for signatures est apparu en premier sur Le portail de référence pour l'espace de liberté, sécurité et justice.

Author :
Print