Original text
European Commission - Speech [Check Against Delivery] Remarks by Commissioner Hoekstra at the ENVI Council press conference Brussels, 17 March 2026 Good evening to all of you, Let me thank the Cyprus Presidency for a very fruitful set of meetings today. Many thanks for stepping in and steering us through the agenda. Let me briefly reflect on the three items that are mostly on my agenda. First, on automotive . We came...
European Commission - Speech [Check Against Delivery] Remarks by Commissioner Hoekstra at the ENVI Council press conference Brussels, 17 March 2026 Good evening to all of you, Let me thank the Cyprus Presidency for a very fruitful set of meetings today. Many thanks for stepping in and steering us through the agenda. Let me briefly reflect on the three items that are mostly on my agenda. First, on automotive . We came out in December with a proposal to revise the regulation on CO2 standards for new passenger cars and vans, as part of the broader automotive package. In my view, a package that is robust, pragmatic, does justice to all the ambitions that we have, and also takes into account the political landing zone. It was very good to have this first debate where you see Member States articulate their specific views. For some, the proposal was not necessary at all because they would prefer to stick to the dimensions as we have today. For others, they might have articulated to do even more than what is on the table. I am sure we can craft a path forward that does justice to what is needed for Europe at large from the dimensions of climate competitiveness and independence, and at the same time make sure we have a political landing zone. Second, we had a very good conversation on the post-2030 framework with which the Commission will come later this year. That is important because we have the infrastructure towards 2030 with Fit for 55. We have our goal for 2040, but we need to articulate how then to use the decade in between. What is at the heart of the conversation is how do we make sure we get the highest possible impact again on climate but also on competitiveness and independence at the lowest economic and societal cost. That in the end is the equation. The questions we are now diving into is how specific do you then need to be for the various domains? What is it that you want to keep of the Regulation that we currently have and what could you potentially improve? That is a debate that we kicked off today but that we will certainly revisit during the course of the next months. As part of that debate, very significant support for the ETS framework has been voiced. Many have articulated that this is absolutely the cornerstone of our climate policy and others have jumped in to say that even if this would have never been designed for climate it is hugely important to continue on this route given the fact that we also need to have more independence. If anything, the outside events of the last three weeks have been testimony to the fact that there is no alternative. I would like to stress that there is no alternative than to double down on clean tech, renewables, nuclear, grid investments, storage investments – all with more speed. Third, we had a very good conversation on COP31, where in my view the name of the game is threefold. One is clearly we have concerns about the lack of effectiveness of the internation system. I have articulated that earlier also to you , earlier this week to Simon Stiell, and talked with Chris Bowen already a number of times and will talk again later this week. It is important that we make this the whole endeavour of the COP as effective as possible. At the same time, let's also be realistic. The overall design with unanimity as its core is as difficult to reform as the UN is itself. There I would be realistic. Secondly, what we will continue to do and Member States have done that in the past, we recommitted to outreach with those with whom we very much agree. But as you know, diplomacy is also very much about talking to those with whom you don't agree. So the second one is outreach. And the third element that is important going forward is that given multilateralism and the fact that unanimity comes with so many barriers, could we then focus on more plurilateral initiatives? Think about what the Commission is doing in the domain of ETS and pushing that. Many embarked on carbon pricing themselves. Think about the initiative by Colombia and the Dutch that will recently take place in Colombia. Think about the Climate Club Germany has started, and can we strengthen those types of initiatives? All things not literally in the domain of the COP, but a much better chance of success even though maybe not the whole family of 195 is joining. That was the third discussion. Three times: very fruitful, highly constructive, and a great step forward today. These are three themes that will stay with us for at least months to come. Thank you. SPEECH/26/635 Press contacts: Anna-Kaisa ITKONEN (+32 2 29 57501) Ana CRESPO PARRONDO (+32 2 29 81325) General public inquiries: Europe Direct by phone 00 800 67 89 10 11 or by email
Speech Brief