Reporterre spoke with each of the candidates for the environmentalist primary for the presidential election of 2022. Today, the MEP Yannick Jadot, who supports the end of free trade agreements, the exit from nuclear power, a thirteenth summer month or even citizen income.
Reporterre publishes every day of the week the portrait and the interview of one of the five candidates for the primary of environmentalists, whose first round takes place from September 16 to 19 and the second September 25-28, with a view to the 2022 presidential election. The running order has been drawn.
Reporterre – What are the first three measures that should be adopted to stem the climate crisis and the sixth extinction of species?
Yannick Jadot – Each euro of public money spent on public markets, subsidies to the economy and to companies, must be virtuous for the climate, biodiversity, social justice and gender equality. For example, one euro of public money will no longer be paid to a company still engaged in fossil fuels. TO?? Through the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and its implementation in France, we will also sign agricultural transition contracts which will allow us to phase out synthetic phytosanitary products, pesticides or fertilizers nitrogen which largely contribute to climate change and the disappearance of living things.
Then we will stop imports of soybeans and beef from Latin America, or palm oil from Southeast Asia and Southeast Asia and Southeast Asia. ??Central Africa. This notably involves the end of free trade agreements. It has been the heart of my fights in the European Parliament for over ten years. These treaties organize the war of “all against all”, it is the globalization of junk food, animal suffering, the extinction of species or the disappearance of peasants. We will also have to get out of industrial breeding and drastically reduce our consumption of meat, milk and fish.
I also carry a large investment plan of 50 billion euros per year to rebuild the economy, accelerate the renovation of housing, develo use renewable energies and everything related to collective and carbon-based mobility. I therefore support the ban on the sale of thermal vehicles in France from 2030.
I also defend the establishment of a large ministry of food, health and the environment, which would be the first ministry of the government in © ecologist. These three major issues would be articulated through the “one health” approach. This great ministry would make it possible to root out lobbies from essential public decisions, which are in the general interest.
The energy transition will not happen without action on energy savings, a blind spot for politicians. What action should be taken for energy sobriety?
By investing 10 billion euros in the energy renovation of housing, by promoting deep renovations. This measure must be inseparable from the fight against precariousness and, to put an end to energy sieves, thermal renovation must be made possible without a euro being spent by the 2Â million households who need it most.
We must also review our modes of mobility by re-equipping and massively reinvesting in rail, whether they are daily trains – we will reopen small stations -, at night and for goods. To promote soft mobility, we are in favor of compulsory payment of the mobility package by companies, for bicycles or public transport.
The interest of these measures is deeply social: when we invest in both thermal renovation and social housing, when we differentiate the VAT rates according to what is virtuous or not, when we invest in accessible mobility for the most socially affected families, we get what I call the “thirteenth summer month of the power to live” : the equivalent of a thirteenth month in savings, which gives us the power to live to do something other than work, to meet basic needs, while protecting life .
I have been fighting nuclear, military or civilian, for thirty years. I was also spied on by EDF when I was campaign manager for Greenpeace. There is no ambiguity: nuclear energy is dangerous, opaque and threatening the very existence of a service energy public, since it is the whole of the EDF company which is threatened today.
We have to go back to the négaWatt scenario which foresees massive investments in energy efficiency – otherwise we are not serious -, the equally massive deployment of energy renewable energies, and promote local energy communities. This should lead us to phase out, gradually, but inevitably, nuclear power. Twenty years from now, and by closing as a priority the oldest and most at risk power plants, in particular due to climate change, since some are cooled by rivers which themselves heat up too much, or no longer have enough flow due to droughts.
We must also put an end to the omerta that reigns over the reality of nuclear power in France. We must make transparent its costs compared to renewable energies. And remember that there is no responsible solution for radioactive waste. The exit from nuclear power is also an issue of social rationality: the energy transition as we carry it – sobriety, renewables, intelligent networks – represents much more of? jobs than nuclear.
Go to VIáµ ?? Republic is a widely shared priority. But which development of the Constitution do you think is a priority?
The Macron option is to concentrate all the powers and, basically, to say “See you in five years”. The one that I defend, and that environmentalists defend, is to restore democracy everywhere. I am in favor of a non-renewable seven-year term for the Presidency of the Republic and a clear separation of powers. We see today how the executive tries to denigrate and question the independence of justice. Parliamentarians should have more power and be elected on a proportional basis, so that political sensibilities are truly represented. The president must also be responsible for the long term, that of ecology.
Beyond the institutions, it is necessary to develop what is linked to participatory democracy: referendum of local initiative, citizens’ conventions, consensus conferences. It also means more democracy in the company. I propose a system with 50% employees on boards of directors and a union check, which would strengthen the power of unions and their place in the company. We will also strengthen our associative system, with the return of subsidized jobs in associations.
“I do not want the dilution of ecology in another political movement nor an identity ecology that is necessarily a minority.”
Finally, we must relaunch a great process of decentralization: the latest laws have generated a thousand sheets of responsibilities, competences and incomprehensible administration for the citizens. François Hollande’s garages are a disaster. We must clarify, strengthen the skills of local communities, since a whole part of the ecological transition, social progress and emancipation is built with the citizens there. Scale of territories.
How can we ensure that greenhouse gas emissions are greatly reduced worldwide?
France is the country of the Paris Agreement. This does not mean that she is the sole architect of the success of this agreement, but it does give her a responsibility, that of being exemplary. Today, the issue is no longer to make big speeches, to stick to COPs that very often lead to other COPs, where the UN negotiation process is more often saved than the climate. The stake, it is the exemplarity by showing, on the scale of France and Europe – since the two are intimately linked in terms of energy transition -, that it is quite possible to transform our societies, that this helps to relocate the economy and create jobs. Building an ecological society will undoubtedly require effort and change, but it will offer exciting prospects for social, democratic, economic and technological innovations. We must show that the fight for the climate is also a promise of individual and collective freedom and emancipation.
It will also be necessary to work to put an end to the neoliberal, cocidal, ecologically and socially predatory globalization, and to ensure that the most fragile populations are not negatively impacted by the fight against climate change but, on the contrary, benefit from it. I also like the idea of a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty: countries would commit to ending public subsidies to governments. fossil fuels – 55 billion euros per year in Europe—, and to no longer look for new deposits in the soil.
The rich have an impact with their consumption, but also their financial investments. I support the reinstatement of a wealth tax (ISF), much more effective than the previous one which was undermined by exemptions. I find the idea of a climate wealth tax developed by associations very interesting. We will also come back to the “flat-tax” so that the tax on capital ceases to be more attractive than that on labor. Tax reform will also have to deal with asset inequalities.
For the most vulnerable, I therefore defend the thermal renovation and the thirteenth school month, but also a citizen income, accessible from 18 years old, which would start at 660 euros per month for gradually rise to the poverty line. We must therefore both restore tax justice in this country, but also help those who are below.
I defended, with my European colleagues, the implementation of the European directive of 2001 on temporary protection, which was adopted afterwards. s war in Kosovo but has never been enforced. It makes it possible to welcome people in danger, in the grip of oppression and violence. And we absolutely have to go back to the Dublin III regulation, a totally crazy system that transfers all responsibility for reception to the front-line countries.
And then it is urgent to break with the absurd policy of trying to counter migration, to prevent so-called “drafts” by tearing up tents, by strengthening the pre charity and humiliation of migrants in our territory. It is urgent to stop abandoning migrants who cross the Mediterranean or continents, and are subject to persecution and drowning. This policy has already killed 1,000 people in the Mediterranean this year, and nearly 20,000 since 2014. It is inhuman and ineffective.
There are several types of violence. For those linked to the maintenance of order, especially in the demonstrations, we have experienced during this five-year period a break in the republican tradition of maintaining order. The objective is now to prevent and discourage, by violence, the logics of trap, the LBD  or the grenades, those and those who want to exercise their right to demonstrate . These strategies seriously hurt, scare and also put the police at risk.
There is also everything that comes under the politics of numbers. It leads to a multiplication of controls, as on cannabis – I defend its legalization -, facie controls or migrant controls; they construct a logic of violence and humiliation incompatible with the republican protection missions that the police teams must carry out.
I defend the idea of transforming the Ministry of the Interior into a Republican Ministry of Protection, where we would redefine the missions of the police and police officers so that they are more focused on prevention, with training on violence against women and children, on mistreatment, discrimination or even on crimes in the field of ????environment. We must reform the police – recruitment, missions, workforce, equipment, strategy – so that it no longer scares a certain number of fellow citizens, and is perceived as a body that protects people. our security in the broad sense of the term, and our fundamental freedoms.
The police must be exemplary to the citizens, but we must also be to them. We can then be more demanding. And of course, to resolve the cases of violence, I want the IGPN  to be transferred to the Defender of Rights, to ensure objective and impartial police investigations. .
By recognizing, fully and completely, the profound inequality that exists today between women and men. Regarding violence, there are three rapes per hour in our country. The overwhelming majority of domestic violence is committed by men, of which women are dramatically victims. There have already been 77 feminicides since the start of the year. We need a great program, in Spain, of massive investment in the training of all actresses and actors in national education, in justice , police and public services. We need to be able to identify weak signals and provide support.
The difference in pay remains significant between women and men as well, and it is totally unjustifiable. Through education, our society must teach us to be much smarter, more built and informed on issues of gender, sexual orientation, education. equality and discrimination. Despite the #MeToo movement and the free speech that has fortunately been freed, we remain in a society with an extremely sexist model of consumption. The liberation of women remains a struggle.
Imagine that Anne Hidalgo (PS) and Jean-Luc MÃ © lenchon (LFI) each offer you an alliance. Who are you going with?
I suggest they come behind me because we, environmentalists, are the bearers of the only project capable of largely bringing together progressives and humanists. I do not want the dilution of ecology in another political movement nor a necessarily minority ecology of identity. Five years ago, because it was the choice of the Europe Ecology movement – The Greens (EELV), we withdrew the ecological candidacy in favor of the candidate chosen by the Socialists, BenoÃ ®t Hamon, because he had a program inspired by ecology. The outcome was disappointing to say the least. We must therefore be able to impose a balance of power so that the gathering, which everyone agrees must be done around ecology, is around of the environmentalist candidacy. If I am nominated, I will be the candidate for the President of the Republic who will guarantee that there will be a green ballot for the President and that this ballot will collect widely, with only one objective: to win!
Register in less than a minute to receive free by e-mail, every day or every week, a selection of articles published by Reporterre.
What if we changed society? The Collective Never Again! proposes a “rupture plan”
Reporterre is a media that offers clear and relevant information on ecology in all its dimensions, as well as a space for forums to reflect and discuss. In all its dimensions means that for us, ecology is political, and cannot be reduced to questions of nature and pollution – even if we closely follow these vital questions.