speech Commission EU

Remarks by Commissioner Hoekstra at the European Parliament's Environment Committee

28 janvier 2026 Collecté le 18 mars 2026 Voir sur la Commission européenne

Source : Commission européenne — Communiqués de presse

Résumé

Résumé non disponible

Contenu du document

Ce document juridique est long (13,539 caractères). Consultez le texte complet sur la source officielle.

Voir sur la Commission européenne

Remarks by Commissioner Hoekstra at the European Parliament's Environment Committee

This site uses cookies. Visit our cookies policy page or click the link in any footer for more information and to change your preferences.

Accept all cookies Accept only essential cookies

Select your language Close

EU official languages

bgбългарски

csčeština

dadansk

deDeutsch

elΕλληνικά

enEnglish

esespañol

eteesti

fisuomi

frfrançais

gaGaeilge

hrhrvatski

huMagyar

itItaliano

ltlietuvių kalba

lvlatviešu valoda

mtMalti

nlNederlands

plpolski

ptPortuguês

roromână

skslovenčina

slslovenščina

svsvenska

Search Search

... HomePress corner Remarks by Commissioner Hoekstra at the European Parliament's Environment Committee

Available languages: English Speech Jan 28, 2026 Brussels 9 min read

Remarks by Commissioner Hoekstra at the European Parliament's Environment Committee

"Check against delivery"

Honourable Members,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Thank you very much, Mr. Liese, and let me also congratulate you with your upgrade, even though it seems it's temporary.

And let me reciprocate by saying that I fully understand that different politicians and different political factions, of course, always have different opinions and certainly not always agree with the Commission.

But I value the range of conversations we're having in formal settings, but also in informal settings, because I think it does sharpen the mind and it helps to build better compromises.

So I just wanted to echo that cooperation to me is indeed hugely important.

Many thanks to you, Mr. Liese, and also to all the Members of Parliament for inviting me for this exchange, on cars and CBAM, more broadly on climate and industrial policy and business.

And of course, that is against the backdrop of truly fundamental geopolitical turmoil.

With everything going on, in my view, the only way forward for the EU is an agenda that manages to combine climate, competitiveness and independence. All three at the same time, but not at the expense of the others.

We're very much committed to staying the course on climate, to ensuring predictability, but we also making sure that we do that in a way that is feasible.

So it is ambition. It is clarity on the ‘why', on the ‘what', but on the ‘how', when we learn new things, we need to take them into account.

Just to give you an example: CBAM simplification. We exempted 90% of businesses while keeping 99% of emissions within scope, and that was a wise decision.

It was a course correction, but it was a hugely important course correction. So let's pursue that logic as we go along.

Cars:

Let me start with the automotive package.

The automotive sector is undergoing a structural transformation, of unprecedented speed and magnitude, and the package supports our industry in this transformation.

This is the outcome of the truly very constructive strategic dialogues we've had and we're now delivering on the industrial action plan for the European automotive sector.

We have notably accelerated the review of the CO2 standards, because we do want to make sure that the standards remain a measure that not only drives decarbonisation of road transport, but also boosts the competitiveness of our industry. And if you look at the numbers, that is a hugely important industry for the European economy, but of course also for many, many, many European workers.

Standards provide predictability that drive investments in the clean transition and that is key as we all want the European car industry not only to navigate the transition but actually to shape it.

We want an industry that remains competitive globally and that is fit for the future. That future, experts continue to tell me, is overwhelmingly or completely electric.

And I'm not an engineer myself, but engineers continue to tell me, if you look at the engine itself and you look at just its performance, where it is today, but certainly where it will be in the future, you have to acknowledge that the performance is superior.

The electric transformation is also happening globally. In 2025, one in four cars sold globally was electric, and in Europe, too, the transition is happening. The European battery electric vehicles market reached a historic 90% share in 2025, and that was up four percentage points from 2024.

At the same time, over the past months, concerns and conversations have emerged. People have been discussing how can we take an approach that is fit for purpose, that in some cases is more pragmatic. And that is exactly, what we're proposing.

Our proposal maintains a clear market signal towards electrification. It provides more flexibility at the same time. It has technological neutrality baked into it as European carmakers ramp up their development and manufacturing towards clean mobility. Simply put, carmakers will have more options to reach their targets.

With the reduction of the 2035 target to 90%, still the overwhelming part of the market and the percentage, of course, plug-in hybrids, range extenders, mild hybrids, and internal combustion engine vehicles may still play a role beyond 2035. And at the same time, and that is very important to signal, our proposal is climate neutral.

That is because the 10% remaining emissions will be compensated by the use of low-carbon steel and by e-fuels and biofuels put on the market. That, to me, is also at the nexus of the arrangement. It will create a lead market for low-carbon steel made in the European Union, which otherwise would not be there.

In the shorter term, we propose a compliance regime that will apply over several years to make sure we help meet the 2030 target, just like we did last year for the 2025 target. This additional flexibility will help carmakers to comply with the 2030 objectives while at the same time preserving overall ambition.

For vans specifically, we have acknowledged the short-term challenges of electrification by reducing their 2030 targets. The proposal also has a demand-side dimension that is very important to many of our Member States and also to many of you around here.

First, it incentivises small electric cars made in Europe by providing super credits for such cars. And that is important because it will benefit industry, it will also benefit citizens, and particularly those citizens currently less exposed to this market.

Secondly, the proposal includes updated labelling requirements for cars and vans. And this aims to ensure that vehicle buyers across the EU are well informed about the emissions of the vehicle on offer, both new and second hand.

Then there is the targeted amendment to HDV CO2 standards, because we face specific concerns in the domain of truck manufacturers. The demand, unfortunately, is insufficient, and we thought it was wise to add additional flexibility, which will ease their compliance with the 2030 target. At the same time, the question is – how do we make sure they are able to play catch up and manage to remain at the very top of their industry, which they absolutely are. It's a fantastic industry, while at the same time going through this transition as quickly as possible.

Then the corporate fleets under my colleague, Apostolos Titsikostas. He has proposed an initiative that will complement the CO2 standards by providing long-term certainty for car manufacturers in the domain of demand for clean vehicles.

Corporate vehicles, as many know, generally have higher mileage than private ones. They reach the second-hand market faster. And his initiative will therefore help to reduce emissions faster and make zero-emission solutions more affordable. What is important to note, because that has been part of the conversation with players outside of the political spectrum, is the setting of minimum national targets for the share of clean vehicles in new car registrations. Let's make sure at the same time that SMEs are out of scope. And let's give Member States full flexibility to decide how they reach those targets.

Then there's the battery booster. Stéphane Séjourné, myself and others have worked a lot on that.

We're committed to de-risking the business case for batteries, hugely important, they have to be manufactured more often in Europe. And as I'm sure Parliament knows, we've invested EUR 1.5 billion from the Innovation Fund that will be mobilised in 2026 through the Battery Booster Facility.

Last on this one, the automotive omnibus. The number, of course, in terms of value is smaller.

Still, yearly savings of approximately EUR 700 million is an important thing to note.

CBAM:

Expanding CBAM scope to downstream product is extremely important.

Many industries have been visiting us to explain why this is absolutely critical. And that goes beyond, but certainly includes, the proverbial washing machine.

We just want to make sure that production of these products down the chain does not move out of the EU. So we're expanding CBAM scope to include downstream products addressing this specific problem.

It is a proportionate way to do it. We only included goods for which the cost of carbon would be high enough to make it all sufficiently simple.

Secondly, avoidance of obligations.

That is a real threat which may undermine the whole system's integrity. And therefore, extending CBAM to certain downstream goods will address the challenges to some extent, but there is more that we need to do.

We therefore must implement stringent rules that discourage other CBAM avoidance practice. Being able to demand additional evidence for emission calculations is a start. If importers cannot provide this evidence, they may in the future be subject to default country values. So there is clarity for companies what happens if they cannot live up to our expectations here.

And that steps, in my view, very much ensures fair and trustworthy emissions reporting, helping to maintain the mechanism's robust integrity.

Then there is a third critical area concerning emissions from electricity calculated within CBAM's framework. By improving the rules for calculating the embedded emissions of electricity as a CBAM good, we encourage third country producers to focus on decarbonising their own power generation.

And that again liaises and aligns with our overarching goal of minimising global emissions.

Fourth, the temporary decarbonisation fund. In tandem with strengthening CBAM, we're introducing this fund to make sure we're able to temporarily support EU producers of CBAM goods and mitigate carbon leakage risks.

We do this because this addresses the competitiveness laws on international markets where EU goods might be supplanted by cheaper, but at the same time by more emission-intensive alternatives.

And if this happens, we don't only use market shares for our products, we also incentivise more polluting rather than less.

The way it works is that this fund will reimburse EU producers of CBAM goods at an increased carbon leakage risk for some of the carbon costs they incur, ensuring that their compliance doesn't lead to carbon leakage.

Just to be clear, this is an interim solution for two years before we can implement longer-term solutions based on the ETS review, which we will kick off this year.

Last but not least, CBAM implementation. We've successfully launched the definitive phase of CBAM on January 1st.

In the preceding months, the Commission has worked very closely with Member States, with a range of industrial leaders, stakeholders to finalise necessary implementation acts. And these incorporate simplifications agreed earlier in 2025, also by your esteemed Parliament and the Council.

So all in all, CBAM continues to represent, in my view, a truly significant tool in our climate policy toolbox.

And together with the ETS, it drives effective emission reductions, it secures climate investments, and there is an anticipation effect already happening, or was actually already happening before we introduced it.

I think it is a wise step further. And I want to thank all of you who have put a lot of effort into it in the past for that endeavour. Let me close there.

Restez informé

Recevez les mises à jour réglementaires directement dans votre boîte mail.

Pas de spam. Uniquement des mises à jour pertinentes.