SPIEGEL: The economic crisis will continue to rage on between now and the climate summit in December, and it will rob millions of people of their jobs. Under these circumstances, some heads of state could be tempted to delay moving forward on a global climate treaty until the worst is over.
Gabriel: You don't even have to look abroad to find that. You'll hear the same sentiments coming from some economic officials and from the CDU/CSU (the conservative Christian Democratic Union and its Bavarian sister party, the Christian Social Union). But we have no time to lose. Let's hope that people will have realized by December that the financial crisis is a prime example of unsustainable economies, and that we should protect the planet from suffering a similar blow to the one currently afflicting the global economy. I'm actually quite optimistic that investments that save resources, save energy and are green, while at the same time making life less costly and our economy more competitive will pick up speed tremendously.
SPIEGEL: There was little evidence of that at the G-20 summit.
Gabriel: At least the participants moved a passage on stabilizing the economy in an environmentally responsible way to the front of their closing statement. Half a year ago, those words would have been inconceivable. But there was a lack of concretion, and that was weak. The G-20 will have to correct this deficiency before Copenhagen, or things will be more than difficult.
SPIEGEL: Doesn't an environment minister have to scrutinize the consumption behavior and lifestyle of citizens, even at the risk of not making any friends in the process?
Gabriel: Should I come up with something like (former Environment Minister) Jürgen Trittin's can deposit program, which led to a boom in disposable packaging? Now there's a case of maximum unpopularity coupled with maximum damage! I also don't think much of puritanically suggesting to people that they exercise restraint. That doesn't cause the auto industry to modify its engines. And we didn't solve the waste problems of the 1980s with non-consumption, but by charging a price for waste and developing ways to avoid waste or recycle. We consume more today than we did then, and yet we produce drastically less waste. The limits of growth as a political message have failed worldwide.
SPIEGEL: That's an astonishing admission. What then is the issue?
Gabriel: The issue is not less growth, but the right kind of growth. Either our children will pay a very high price, because they will have run out of fish and the rainforests will be gone, or we are prepared not to ignore the costs today and accept somewhat higher prices. This is really the issue at the climate protection talks. Although the heading is climate protection, there is an unofficial agenda that reflects the economic interests of those living today and the economic interests of those want to live better lives tomorrow. We have to begin talking about this openly instead of covering it up.
SPIEGEL: Do you still want to be minister of the environment at the Copenhagen climate summit in December?
Gabriel: Yes, if I have the choice, although one shouldn't overestimate one's influence. Nevertheless, someone who represents a country like Germany at the summit and has enough clout in domestic politics to achieve his goals will enjoy opportunities that not every minister gets.
SPIEGEL: Have you thought about how your ministry could be restructured in the future?
Gabriel: I think a Ministry of Climate, Energy and the Environment would be the right thing. Energy and environmental policy belong together, under one roof.
SPIEGEL: What would you tackle if you were given the same position again?
Gabriel: Finding permanent repositories for highly active nuclear waste is at the very top of the list of environmental tax reforms. We still offer too many incentives, including tax incentives, for people to behave in ways that harm the environment, and we don't reward environmental friendliness enough. And, of course, we need a real environmental code.
SPIEGEL: Will you manage to dry out the nuclear waste swamp in the Asse mine, where pesticides containing arsenic and animal cadavers are now suddenly turning up?
Gabriel: It's pretty bad, all the new information that keeps emerging. The people who were responsible at the time -- whether it was the operators of the Asse mine or the nuclear industry -- made catastrophic mistakes. Now everything is finally being exposed, and the population will be involved for the first time in examining all options to close the site. If it's technically possible and it makes things safer in the long term, I am in favor of removing the toxic waste from the Asse mine.
Post to other social networks:
Stay informed with our free news services:
| All news from SPIEGEL International | Twitter | RSS |
| All news from Germany section | RSS |
© SPIEGEL ONLINE 2009
All Rights Reserved
Reproduction only allowed with the permission of SPIEGELnet GmbH
