Czech Business Today

During the campaign for the European elections, the discussion in the Czech Republic narrowed down to Euro 7 and to the demand for the cancellation of the Green Deal. Can the agreement really be cancelled? How realistic is it?

As the Green Deal was confirmed by EU leaders, it is difficult to cancel it completely. However, a clear goal does not mean it is set in stone. This did not happen even after the outbreak of war aggression by Russia. On the contrary, the Commission proposed to increase the targets for renewable sources and for energy efficiency. For instance, it proposed increasing the target for renewable energy to 45% by 2030, which was 5% more than it had proposed before the outbreak of war aggression. In the end, the co-legislators did not support the proposal, but it shows that the parameters can be changed. The Green Deal is therefore not a static document, but a vision towards a clear 2050 goal, with steps that can be adapted over the years to developments and progress made. Correction is possible, cancellation is not.

The modification of the Green Deal requires, firstly, a regulatory change and, secondly, that this change must be agreed upon. The proposal of such changes is possible, for example, by amending the adopted acts, in the form of amending specific measures that overlap with others. Further adjustments to the agreement are possible, for example, by shifting the dates of applicability for obligations that have not yet come into force. An argument for moving the deadline can be that the technology that the regulation envisaged is not yet on the market, or is not available to such an extent.

There is also a lot of room for adjustment in reducing administrative burdens and trimming cumbersome ESG reporting. And last but not least, corrections can also occur where a revision of the texts is expected on a certain date.

At the European level, the right of legislative initiative lies with the Commission (i.e. proposing directives and regulations), not the European Parliament or the Council of the EU. However, this does not mean that the Commission cannot receive impulses from Eurodeputies or Member States. Quite the opposite, and that’s what happens in practice. Indeed, Members of the European Parliament can adopt statements, resolutions, or reports on their own initiative in which they point out the need to regulate. If the MEPs are loud and specific enough about what overlaps, shortcomings, or problems need to be solved, the Commission will be able to respond to this appeal legislatively.   

At the moment, the EESC is working on how to recalibrate the Green Deal in order to equip the MEPs with a list of suggested corrective measures.

The prerequisite for good implementation is also monitoring the measures that the EU adopted within the Green Deal, as there is no such public overview. It would also help companies to see what obligations they have to comply with.

The ending mandate of the EU institutions was marked by a regulatory storm of over 8,000 acts (directives, regulations, implementing and delegated acts). This is unbearable for entrepreneurs. If politicians do not understand the urgency of the situation, Europe will become an open-air museum.

Source: Alena Mastantuono, EESC Employers´ Group, rapporteur for the opinion on Recalibrating the Green Deal The Czech version was published on www.komora.cz