the Debate is about whether Swedish society for nature conservation performed an audit of the Swedish meps voted in favour of the central miljöomröstningar during the term of office. The audit also includes a review of the thousands of posts, amendments, reports and opinions from the Swedish members of the riksdag. On the basis of röstbeteende and collected the commitment to the environment, nature conservation given every Swedish parliamentarians an environment rating on: excellent, good, okay or bad. Gunnar Hökmark gets a bad environment rating on the.
another new review of EU parliamentarians, carried out by the Climate action network (CAN) Europe, which has 150 member organisations, lands in the same results as we. The conservatives are sitting in the parliament's largest group, the EPP, which according to CAN shown a total lack of climate policy action.
for Example, why the Conservatives voted against the carbon dioxide emissions from new trucks and heavy vehicles will be reduced by 20 percent by 2025, and 35% by 2030. But rather than trying to Hökmark move the focus.
Nuclear energy has not been considered by the EU parliament during their term and are therefore not included in our review. Hökmarks article may, in particular, is regarded as a post in the national the nuclear debate. The conservatives want to tear up the energiöverenskommelse concluded only three years ago, thereby endangering the long-term rules of the game that the Swedish energy market and industry demands. We regret that Hökmark reduces the discussion on the EU climate and environment policy to a national debate on Swedish nuclear power.
We are representing one of the largest and oldest democratic social movements, with members from all the partisan camps, find this kind of attack not more than remarkable.
It is problematic that a number of commentators, including Conservatives top candidate to the EUROPEAN parliament, falsely started to claim that the UN's intergovernmental panel on climate change, advocates of nuclear power. The UN intergovernmental panel on climate change do not take a position for some technologies to reduce emissions. Neither does it say that nuclear power is essential to cope with climate change targets, but it presents the only possible scenarios ahead. In all their scenarios are nuclear power with a small part in the future global energy mix, but the underlying studies show a variation from a reduction in nuclear to an increase in nuclear power globally.
On Twitter, he writes, by reason of our op-ed that the environmental movement has a ”totalitarian leanings” as ”directed against democracy”. We are representing one of the largest and oldest democratic social movements, with members from all the partisan camps, find this kind of attack not more than remarkable.
instead of attacking the environmental movement needs politicians such as Gunnar Hökmark, who have long been sitting on the sole positions of power in society, engage in self-criticism. Policy-makers have failed so far to tackle the environmental challenges. The inability to respond to science alerts means that we are now facing an extremely dangerous situation that threatens our entire civilization. There is still an opportunity to take command and choose the rapid conversion to a sustainable society that gives our children and young people a future to hope for. But it requires politicians who take on this mission with the utmost seriousness. Therefore, the elections to the EUROPEAN parliament the 26 of may so important.