Presidency Conclusions
Earlier this month, the European Council met and produced Presidency Conclusions. The European Council comprises the heads of government of the member states of the EU and is an altogether bigger deal than the Council of Ministers which is the gathering of the responsible members of government for whichever policy area any particular council meeting covers.

Policy areas
So, for a change, I though I would share with you some of the aforesaid Conclusions, not least because they address a number of policy areas covered by my committee.

Lisbon strategy
First was the Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs. This dates back to 1999 and was originally dreamed up by Mr Barroso (then Portuguese Prime Minister and now President of the Commission) and Mr Blair in the heady days of the dotcom boom as the means of making Europe the most dynamic, knowledge based economy in the world by 2010.

Review of Single Market
Well, here we are in 2007 and the best the Council can come up with is to invite the Commission to submit an ambitious and comprehensive review of the Single Market as early as possible in the second half of 2007. Not a dicky bird about the economies outside Europe which we are supposed to overtake within three years but haven’t a hope of doing so.

Target spend for research
Next was a reference to strengthening innovation, research and education. I’ll leave education to the culture committee or, better still, to the Member States where it should be. But research is one of the main responsibilities covered by my committee and is one area where there are benefits in organising it at a European level without duplicating national efforts. However, we remain in the realm of targets with a reiteration of the importance of spending 3% of gdp on research and development by 2010.

Lagging behind
Only Finland and Sweden are able to say they have achieved the magic figure, largely thanks to Nokia and Ericsson respectively. The big three of France, Germany and the UK lag some way behind without much sign of current policies and, in particular, taxation regimes being able to up the ante. We are all in favour of research spending in principle but actually achieving high levels without just blowing money on footling projects is much more challenging.

Energy and climate policy
And challenging is the word to describe the third area I want to mention, the part to which most of the Conclusions are devoted. I refer to energy and climate policy, or rather an integrated climate and energy policy as it is headed. The Energy Policy for Europe was published by the Commission in January and has been largely adopted by the Council to pursue three objectives which sound a wee bit familiar to me.

Three pillars of energy policy
Increasing security of supply; ensuring the competitiveness of European economies and the availability of affordable energy; promoting environmental sustainability and combating climate change. These three pillars of energy policy have been around every since I have been in the European Parliament and were probably being enunciated before 1994. The order and priority has varied over the years but the simple aims of competitiveness, security of supply and sustainability are essentially still the same.

Ambitious targets
However this time some much more specific and ambitious targets have been agreed in response to widespread and growing concerns about global warming and import dependency. Reducing EU greenhouse gas emissions by 30% over 1990 base values by 2020 (or a firm independent commitment to achieve at least a 20% reduction of GHG emissions by 2020 – take your choice!).

Binding targets
Increase energy efficiency in the EU so as to achieve the objective of saving 20% of the EU’s energy consumption compared to projections for 2020 (ie what it would have been). A binding target of a 20% share of renewable energies in overall EU energy consumption by 2020. A binding minimum target to be achieved by all Member States for the share of biofuels in overall EU transport petrol and diesel consumption by 2020. So, no lack of ambition you could say.

Nuclear’s role
The problems start when we consider in practical terms how to achieve these goals. To be fair, the Conclusions did not indulge in the sort of head in sand attitude that used to be the case in the recent past with regard to nuclear energy and the crucial role it must play if we are to stand any chance of achieving or getting close to these targets. But nor did they make the sort of emphatic endorsement I believe they should.

Let’s get on with it!
Nuclear energy provides 31% of electricity consumed in Europe, closely followed by coal at 30%. I have no doubt in my mind that we should increase that share to at least 40% (so I am addicted to targets too!) while replacing coal fired capacity with modern clean coal technology and, ideally, carbon capture and storage capability. And we must pursue the efficiency and renewables targets because we need it all. But, it all takes time and we need to get on with it. Setting targets is easy but, sadly, the EU does not have a good record of achieving them. Whoops, was that a pig I saw flying by?!