Cieltje Van Achter is concerned about the Brussels climate ordinance: “Climate policy determined by judges?”

There was a vote on the Brussels government’s climate ordinance on Wednesday. The Vivaldi majority wants to use this climate ordinance to legally cement the Brussels targets for reducing CO2 emissions. The N-VA voted against it.

N-VA group leader Cieltje Van Achter is concerned about the adopted climate ordinance. “There is a lot of uncertainty today about Brussels’ climate policy and whether the Brussels targets for 2030 will be met at all. For example, a European study centre has already criticised the Brussels renovation strategy, which is nevertheless the most important part of achieving this government’s CO2 emission reduction targets. Yet this majority is setting its objectives in cement in an ordinance that will be enforceable in court. Brussels is thus opening the door to a climate policy determined by judges, and the N-VA is wary of that.”

No detailed figures yet

To date, the Brussels-Capital Parliament has not received a detailed calculation of Brussels’ climate measures from Minister Maron, Cieltje Van Achter says. “Despite my repeated request. Such a quantified estimate seems to me to be crucial in assessing the feasibility of the Brussels objectives. We are also still waiting for adjustments to the renovation strategy, after the criticism of the original plan. ”

Vivaldi turns logic on its head

It seems logical to Cieltje Van Achter that Parliament should first discuss the concrete climate measures, such as the renovation strategy, and then see whether the objective is feasible or whether additional measures are needed. “The N-VA is also ambitious in terms of climate policy, but argues for concrete and substantiated measures that actually make a difference. The Vivaldi majority turns the logic on its head. The objective is being cemented in regulations, and the work has yet to begin.”

Lawsuits like the sword of Damocles

This climate ordinance contributes little to achieving the objectives, Cieltje Van Achter concludes. “The intention is primarily to make great promises, rather than also to provide for a concrete plan to deliver on those promises. It is a missed opportunity. By proceeding in this manner, Minister Maron is creating a real threat of lawsuits that will hang over subsequent governments like a sword of Damocles.”