The Court’s criticism raises fundamental questions, particularly in the area of European climate and environmental policy. Among other things, the auditors point to a lack of clear rules for fund management and structural weaknesses in the design of the fund. The planned retroactive compensation for already completed measures is also viewed critically, as it touches on core principles of sound budgetary governance.
Against the backdrop of existing instruments such as the Emissions Trading System (ETS) and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), the debate on efficiency, targeting, and the environmental impact of current EU climate policy is intensifying.
Anja Arndt, AfD Member of the European Parliament and member of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI), stated:
“The Court of Auditors confirms: Brussels’ climate policy is expensive, bureaucratic, and hostile to industry. At the same time, it leads to environmental degradation and additional ecological strain due to the massive expansion of wind and solar power. With ETS 1, industrial companies are increasingly put under pressure by high levies. The planned decarbonization fund shows how Brussels first creates problems and then tries to cover up its own policy failures with new redistribution schemes.”
