How we achieved a climate victory in the Council of Europe

This article was originally released as an edition of my newsletter.


Receive future dispatches.


Last month, the European Court of Human Rights made a landmark ruling: Switzerland’s lack of effective climate action violated human rights. As usual, Greta captured the moment standing outside the court, proclaiming “this is just the beginning” with the global climate movement in raptures.

In a stuffy Council of Europe building looking over the Hungarian Parliament in Budapest, I found out via a tap on the shoulder telling me to check my phone. Eyebrows were raised. This was objectively good news. But for my day this was a pain in the ass.

It was the first meeting of the Council of Europe’s Advisory Council (AC) on Youth. The AC is the best example of youth participation in democracy that I know about. Basically, 30 of us are elected as youth experts to work with national governments on measures for the benefit of young people in the Council of Europe’s 46 member states.

And we were negotiating a text on climate. This text was the result of 6 years of work. Four generations of my friends in the Young European Greens had fought in the AC (along with some other esteemed comrades) to push the CoE from a state of not recognising that climate action is part of its work, to two years of negotiation on the details of the text that would change that, to us voting on it that day.

And then I got the tap on the shoulder from my co-conspirator Agnes. We had been working into the middle of the night preparing to argue our case that this text should be passed. Importantly, two countries had put amendments in that we did not like very much, so we were hoping to get them thrown out.

Oh, and the body requires unanimity. So we need every member state present to agree to it. Hence the two years of negotiation. And hence my eyebrows being raised when I looked at my phone.


The government representatives were spooked.

The job of the people in this room is to represent the position of their government. And, since we were debating climate law, a landmark ruling on climate had blown their careful preparation for this meeting out of the water. However efficient your government ministry is, they’re not going to be able to make a full legal assessment of a 250-page ruling in the space of an afternoon.

The funny thing is that this ruling actually strengthened our position that the Council of Europe should have a recommendation on climate. And indeed, some member states were arguing that this ruling was important and should be mentioned in the text - giving our text extra weight. But the problem is that this would reopen negotiations on the text, and there would be no hope of passing it today.

If we didn’t pass it there and then, it might never pass.

While climate change remains the number one priority for young people in Europe, and is still a high priority for the population as a whole, political momentum has clearly shifted against climate action - in part thanks to the farmers’ protests I recently wrote about.

Our next meeting with governments would not be for another six months, and who knows how many far right-sympathising conservatives will be in power by then.

In other words, the window might be closing for us to pass a recommendation on climate change.


Get the latest changemaking strategies in your inbox.


So we needed to change strategy.

When called upon to speak, as planned, we laid out why the amendments proposed by member states both defied logic and weakened the text, and that this text had already been watered down enough over the last two years of negotiation. But we concluded by saying fine, we will accept these amendments. Because the essential point at this stage is that the Council of Europe has a text on climate change and young people.

In other words, we compromised.

The implications of our compromise were clear. We were making a big sacrifice to make sure that this text was passed today. So these mother fuckers better pass this text or else when we see each other in six months we will fight balls to the wall to get these amendments rejected.

And it worked.

Every member state voted for the text. If this passes the Committee of Ministers, it will be a historic win for the climate movement. The text means heightened international pressure on member states to not only take climate action, but protect climate activists and encourage young people into climate activism. The text is dressed in language of intersectionality and climate justice that until recently would have been considered inappropriate for an institution like the Council of Europe.

Texts like this mean that when activists stand up in court, or politicians stand up in parliament, they can point to this as a pledge by the government to take action.

It’s a bureaucratic text that almost nobody knows about. But like the ruling in Switzerland, it is one more tool in the arsenal of the climate movement.

Compared to direct action, institutional politics is inglorious, unsexy work. But it is an essential part of our collective struggle, and we need more activists pressuring the men in suits for change. Even when that means compromise.

The content of this newsletter is by me. Not the Advisory Council. This is obvious. Please do not sue me x

STUFF WORTH KNOWING


Want more?
Subscribe to my newsletter.


Previous
Previous

My take on the EU elections

Next
Next

The digital organising revolution Europe needs