It is not question of increasing the tax burden

A race against the clock is committed to the disruption of the climate machine. The facts are there, non-negotiable: to live tomorrow in a world in peace, we must reverse the trend of our greenhouse gas emissions in the next five years. Divide by three it is the current position of Jean Jouzel global emissions in 2050, which continue to let a little margin to developing countries, the division by a factor of four, or more, in the countries industrialized. Do not treat the imbalances now, is to pave the way for extreme tensions on what makes us live: water, food, energy and, later, the space livable.

This global challenge, the European Union has made an important first step, with the adoption, last December, of the climate-energy package, which poses an objective of 30 of our emissions reduction by 2020. At the end of the year, the world has go to Copenhagen to find an international agreement on the climate issue.

But the economic crisis no doubt somewhat cooled the ambitions of each. How can we not understand Crises are times of withdrawal, where it is difficult to think tomorrow. Yet it is during these crises need to build a new deal and the France has an important role to play. With the consensus Conference on the climate-energy contribution will be tomorrow, it indeed has the opportunity to give new meaning to his fiscal policy, throwing the regulations to make them less harmful for employment while punishing the excesses of energy consumption.

Transport and building are two key sectors where we have much to do. The advanced to the round table, as the zero eco-loan, also interesting as they are, are far from sufficient. And unlike the heavy industry, submitted at European level a constraint of quantity and the price of the corresponding carbon, these two sectors are not or little covered by the field of European policies. The climate-energy contribution is therefore intended to complement the European system of quotas for emissions for those sectors of diffuse emissions.

Giving the signal that energy prices will increase steadily, and by giving a price to greenhouse gas emissions in the diffuse sectors, the climate-energy contribution is a technological innovation and change of behaviour vital to all. It is not question of increasing the tax burden. Allocation universal climate that we must allow reverse households the proceeds of this tax in the form of a cheque for the tax administration year (approximately 130 euros per household the first year), while for enterprises repayment should pass through a decrease in charges on labour will help not to hamper their competitivenessWhile having a positive impact on employment. Companies subject to a price of carbon due to their integration in the European system of exchange of quotas would not be affected by this contribution.

With the assignment system that we propose fiscally neutral for the enterprises and redistributive households, the France has the means to unilaterally implement a powerful instrument of decarbonisation of the economy, and to doing advance the prospects open race. It is not less essential to quickly bring this measure at European level: the carbon price signal must touch all actors of the European Union, because it is together that we must respond to the challenge of climate change.

The future Swedish Presidency of the Union also plans to include this topic on its agenda. If taxation is not a competence of Europe, nothing prevents to start by creating a group of enhanced cooperation with other Member States, to harmonize environmental taxation. Finally, will be the question of non-CO2 emissions, and particularly agricultural emissions. Too long neglected, methane and nitrous oxide emissions should they also, medium-term support climate change mitigation measures.

To justify the withdrawal of the United States to the Kyoto Protocol, G w. Bush resumed the argument that "the American way of life is not negotiable." Today, the US administration seems ready to put on the table for discussions, helped by the events, a new vision of the "american way of life." But let's be clear: If we must change our lifestyles, it is because it is the survival of humanity.