eu is a desperate energy junkie
Energy can be a dirty business. But when you import more than half your supplies every year, sometimes you just have to get a deal done.
The European Union is addicted to energy imports. Its dependence was brutally exposed whenever Russia turned off the taps. These crises gave impetus to the bloc’sEnergy Union plan.
About 30% of Europe’s gas comes from Russia and the bloc imports 53% of its energy every year at a cost of more than €1 billion a day.
One major aim of the Energy Union strategy is to diversify energy suppliers in a bid to lessen the reliance on Russian gas and Middle Eastern oil.
This means making friends with governments every bit as authoritarian as that ruled by Russia’s Vladimir Putin. Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Libya, Iraq and Iran have been earmarkedas potential suppliers.
Energy and realpolitik go hand in hand. Many governments deal with Saudi Arabia, despite it regularly being branded the worst of the worst in surveys of political rights.
In April 2016, no fewer than eight Commissioners travelled to Iran in a visit to bolster energy ties, even though member states had extended sanctions against Tehran forhuman rights abuses.
Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker met Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev in Brussels today.
The pow-wow was criticised by no fewer than 76 NGOs. They urged Juncker to use the visit to raise Baku’s recordon human rights. Azerbaijan defends itself robustlyfrom such accusations.
Asked today whether energy supplies or human rights would be prioritised in the Brussels-Baku partnership, the Commission saidboth were “important”.
Last week, it said that Juncker wasnot “terribly reserved”when talking to his partners, hinting the Luxembourger could take Aliyev to task.
Juncker even joked to the press, “I’m going to meet the president of Azerbaijan now so the pleasant part of theday is over.”
We may never know what happens behind closed doors. Perhaps wary of difficult questions, the Commission had no plans to hold a press conference with the two presidents.
European Council President Donald Tusk also met with Aliyev. He said they discussed human rights and the importance offreedom of expression. They also discussed the Southern Gas Corridor pipeline.
“Azerbaijan is important for Europe’s energy security and diversification of supplies,” Tusk said.
The EU is an energy junkie. It can only get clean through far greater energy efficiency and domestic renewables.
That is a long way off and policymakers have picked gas as their lower carbon “bridge fuel” to a greener future.
No strongman leader worth his salt will take high falutin’ human rights talk seriously. Not when it comes from an addict who needs his fix.
British Prime Minister Theresa May should insist that Brexit negotiations are heldin “neutral Switzerland”, rather than Brussels, according to Kate Hoey MP. She is a Brexit-supporting member of the opposition Labour party. The Commission managed (just) to keep a straight face and said it wouldinform Michel Barnier.
Nigel Farage is sharing a £4 million London flat with a French politician. His current wife confirmed they have been “living separate lives” for years.
The European Parliament has scolded the UK tabloid press for bad reporting on Brussels’ alleged demand that sports teams and venues display the Union flag. The Parliament pointed out that the EU has no say on sport policy and accused the papers of “scoring an own goal”.
Hawkish German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble said he doesn’t think the UK should be punished during the Brexit negotiations and suggested that the best way to deal with Donald Trump is to watch Angela Merkel and copy her “calm” approach.
A new report has warned that development aid is being siphoned offto house refugeesin the EU. The Commission today published a report on the implementation of environmental lawacross the bloc.
The pressure finally took its toll in Romania. The government withdrew a hugely controversial decree that drew a reported 200,000 people onto the streets of Bucharest. A new bill will be published soon.
Despite not thinking much of it, Donald Trump is going to meet with NATO leaders in May. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has told bitter rivals Kosovo and Serbia to “calm down”.
One Polish MP thinks that it is “just a matter of time” before Trump lifts sanctions against Russia, which will worsen relations between Warsaw and Moscow.
France’s presidential race heated up nicely over the weekend, with Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen both choosing Lyon to launch their campaigns.
Beleaguered Republican candidate François Fillon’s days as his party’s candidate might be over soon, but who would they replace him with?
Most French citizens (80%) told pollsters that they would vote for “a leader that is prepared to change the rules of the game”.
towards a more responsible lifestyle for european students
In 2017, Erasmus, the EU’s flagship education program, celebrates its 30th anniversary.
Erasmus gives students the opportunity to meet new people, to learn about new cultures, to discover new countries. The openness to diversity and the mobility facilitated by this unique program represents a major asset for more and more young Europeans, and is highly appreciated in the professional world. Students and young graduates across Europe are increasingly aware of this and seek to make the best of this experience of a lifetime abroad.
Erasmus also gives students the opportunity to party and celebrate together. Alcohol misuse seems to be particularly widespread among young students, in particular during study exchange periods abroad. Binge drinking among young adults is of particular concern for European policymakers and stakeholders, and mobilises efforts to promote responsible, balanced and safe lifestyles among young people.
The Responsible Party program is a partnership between the Erasmus Student Network (ESN) and Pernod Ricard which endeavours to promote viable solutions to alcohol misuse and safe behaviour among young people.
EurActiv.com organised a high-level debate to discuss experiences in the Erasmus program and the road towards more responsible and safe behaviour among young adults.
Questions discussed included:
• What are the experiences and expectations of the Erasmus students?
• How can responsible partying be promoted among students?
• What roles for student organisations, stakeholders and policymakers?
energising european recovery
Last year’s Winter Energy Package contains the seeds of two fundamental economic and political requirements needed for the EU to prosper: returning some ‘power to the people’, alongside European investment and network integration, write a number of energy experts.
Michael Grubb is professor of climate change policy at University College London; Simon Müller is an analyst at the International Energy Agency in Paris; Jean-Michel Glachant is the director of the Florence School of Regulation; and Karsten Neuhoff heads the climate policy department at DIW Berlin.
Energy is a backbone of economic development. The origin of the EU itself lies in the European Coal and Steel Community, an energy-based treaty that helped to power post-war reconstruction.
December’s Winter Package marks recognition that the energy challenge has changed fundamentally. Embodying the much-vaunted Energy Union, it is constructed around major challenges, which also offer profound opportunities.
The first opportunity lies in the way in which new technologies are revolutionising the potential role of energy consumers, and indeed could create a whole new class of ‘prosumers’. Farmers, retail chains and even households, particularly in rural areas, have new opportunities to be active participants in the energy system.
They can offer generation from localised renewables, and deliver flexibility, for example from automated management of thermal (think fridge and freezers) or electrical (think electric cars) storage. Industrial consumers could also make money from smart scheduling of industrial production or cheap on-site backup generation.
If trust is a problem (and in few sectors is trust in suppliers so low as in energy), and ‘take control’ is seen as an answer, then offering more consumer control over energy use and potentially generation is not a bad place to start.
The EU package offers basic standards, legislative frameworks and data protection systems required to underpin this. Becoming ‘prosumers’ could give hundreds of millions of people a bigger stake in the energy system, and also stem the sense that technology modernisation is leaving rural economies behind.
But the energy transition also demands huge investment, at a time when European economies are struggling with stagnation. Much of European energy infrastructure is aged and polluting, and dependent on fossil fuel imports.
Better networks could improve security and reduce costs. Dramatic reductions in the cost of solar and wind energy in particular (in addition to batteries) brings within reach two interrelated goals: the delivery of the Paris Agreement goals on climate change, and reducing European energy dependence in a world of increasingly febrile international relations just as the US is losing its strategic interest in Middle East oil security.
The Winter Package establishes a governance system to coax and coordinate member states towards the goals already agreed. The transition cannot be bankrolled by government expenditure or by imposing more costs on consumers, but neither is needed.
As many have noted, the paradox of modern finance is the huge pools of private capital which are earning next to nothing, indeed, some institutional investors are accepting negative interest rates for perceived safe havens, like German railway bonds.
This is effectively paying for infrastructure to hold their money. With such cheap capital, renewable energy and network infrastructure can make attractive destinations for investment in an energy transition with investment potentially exceeding €100 billion a year across Europe: enough to help inject some momentum into European economic recovery.
Programmes to improve Eastern Europe’s building efficiency and maybe infrastructure for electric vehicles would make the endeavour even bigger. And even more than modern railways, energy efficiency, and energy sources which once constructed will be very cheap to run, have every prospect of boosting long run productivity.
The key need is to establish investor confidence born of a clear commitment to building a consumer-oriented low carbon energy system fit for the 21st century. The Winter Package makes first promising steps into the direction.
The revised renewables directive includes an article on “Stability of financial support”, which is essential to attract cheap capital to the sector.
Effective reform of carbon pricing can underline the strategic direction for European energy (and raise finance). The financial framework in the package could further facilitate investment in particular against the background of the fragile finances of many southern European countries.
Those countries too would form the natural nucleus for a trans-Mediterranean investment programme to engage North Africa – countries with abundant clean energy resources just cables away, with a desperate need for productive investment which could also help to stem the tide of refugees.
Like the original coal and steel community, the key to stability is not markets, but investment with a common purpose.
A crucial factor in Europe’s malaise is that it has lost its sense of ambition and mission. Developing the energy industries and infrastructure for a 21st century energy system is an investment in all our futures, for which Europe is still best placed to lead.
And who knows, by bringing investment, purpose, and engagement, it might even save the Union itself.
sluggish renewables investment poses challenge to eu energy plans
European investment in renewables has dropped by half since 2011, but the EU remains “well on track” to hit its 2020 target of boosting the sector by 20%, the European Commission said today (1 February) as it launched its second report on its Energy Union strategy.
The EU has promised to make itself the “world number one in renewables”. But while European investment dropped to €44 billion, global backing for renewables has increased to more than €260 billion.
In 2014, there was a 16% renewables share in the bloc final energy consumption and an estimated 16.4% share in 2015, in 2014 renewables generated 27.5% of the EU’s electricity, the European Commission said. This is expected to climb to 50% by 2030.
However, the EU accounts for just 18% of total global investment, a drop from almost 50% six years ago. The Commission said new finance would have to be unlocked to reach the € 379 billion needed every year to reach the EU’s climate and energy targets.
It said that the expanded Juncker Plan could help raise more capital. The cost of renewables was dropping and becoming more competitive, said the executive. Solar modules prices dropped by 80% between the end of 2009 and end of 2015.
The State of the Energy Union report assesses Europe’s progress on the plan, which aims to reduce its dependence on imports and fight climate change. Increasing efficiency and renewable will help reduce demand and global warming pollution. The Juncker Commission analysed progress made up to 2014.
The Commission vowed to put “energy efficiency first” in the flagship strategy. Today the executive said it was optimistic that the EU would hit its 2020 efficiency goal but warned that it would require sustained effort from member states.
The EU has reduced its final energy consumption, which means use by households and businesses, to below the 2020 target. But primary energy consumption, which also includes generation sectors and distribution, loses remains below the 2020 goal.
Final energy consumption dropped by 11% from 2005 to 2014. In 2014, the bloc used 1063 million tonnes of oil equivalent, 2.2% below the 2020 target of 1086 Mtoe.
The EU’s total consumption in 2014 was 1507 Mtoe, 1.6% above the 1483 Mtoe goal for 2030. Primary energy consumption increased slightly from 2014-15 but dropped by 12% from 2005 to 2014.
Greenhouse gas emissions
The EU has binding 2020 targets of a 20% increase in renewables and efficiency above 1990 levels. EU leaders agreed 2030 targets of at least 27% in October 2014, ahead of the 2015 UN Climate Change Conference in Paris.
In Paris, world leaders committed to cap global warming at no more than two degrees above pre-industrial levels.
The success of the landmark deal, which entered into force in November, led the European Commission to increase the 2030 renewables target to 30% in draft legislation. The revised 2030 targets are being scrutinised by MEPs and member states before becoming law.
Increased renewables and efficiency levels will contribute to the EU meeting its targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions. In 2015, renewables contributed to reducing emissions by 436 metric tons of CO2, the same as Italy’s emissions.
Over 2005 to 2015, lower levels of energy consumption helped to cut GHG emission by around 800 million tonnes of CO2 in 2014, almost equal to Germany’s emissions that year.
The bloc has already overshot its 2020 GHG goal of 20%, which has led some campaigners to criticise the target as too low. The EU has a 2030 GHG reduction target of at least 40% compared to 1990 levels.
The Ukraine crisis exposed the EU’s dependence on Russian gas and gave impetus to the plan. The EU imports 53% of all the energy it consumes at a cost of more than 1 billion a day.
Last year renewables made a €16 billion saving on fossil fuel imports, which the Commission said would rise to 58 billion – the GDP of Luxembourg – in 2030.
Greater efficiency reduces import demand. A 30% 2030 efficiency target would save €70 billion in fossil fuel import bill and cut gas imports by 12%, compared to a 27% target, according to Commission analysis.
mepS bolster eu recycling and landfill targets
Members of the European Parliament’s Environment Committee on the 24th of January, moved to increase draft EU recycling and landfill targets that had been lowered by the European Commission in its re-tabled Circular Economy Package.
Supporters of the circular economy argue that there needs to be a shift towards sustainability, where as little of the planet’s finite resources are wasted as possible as the world population booms
The suite of six bills of rules for waste, packaging, landfill end of life vehicles, batteries and accumulators, and waste electronic equipment was put forward by the Commission in December last year.
It had previously withdrawn an earlier version of the package, prepared under the Barroso Commission, as part of its ‘better regulation’ strategy.
Commission First Vice-President Frans Timmermans promised that the new Circular Economy Package would be “more ambitious” than its 2014 predecessor.
But although it included new legislation to encourage easy-to-recycle design of products, it had lower targets for recycling and landfill than the first version.
MEPs in Brussels voted to restore the lowered targets to the level of the original proposal yesterday.
They backed a 2030 recycling target for municipal waste of 70%, the same as the 2014 package but 5% more than the new proposal. They also called for a new 2030 reuse target of 5%. This sub-target aims to encourage the repair and fixing of products.
The 2030 target for packaging recycling was set at 80%, the same as in 2014, but higher than the 75% backed by the executive.
The file, led by Italian Socialists and Democrats MEP Simona Bonafè, must now be voted on in plenary. It is possible, although unlikely, that some of the amendments could be voted down in the full Parliament session, which is scheduled to take place in Strasbourg in March.
“The European Parliament voted today to restore the ambitious target of 70% of recycled waste by 2030, as well as a waste landfill target restricted to 5% by 2030, in line with what the Commission had originally proposed in its more ambitious proposal in 2014,” Bonafè said.
The package will only be finalised once both the Parliament and Council of Ministers agree on an identical text. Malta, which holds the rotating EU Presidency, has said it will try to reach a deal with MEPs before 1 July, when its six month term ends.
Green campaigners welcomed the increased targets but called for them to be retained during negotiations with the Council. The two sides are not thought to be too far apart, with some observers expecting the Council to back either the 70% or 65% recycling target.
Piotr Barczak, waste policy officer at the European Environmental Bureau, said: “The strong support shown for the recycling and repair sector by MEPs today can pave the way for over 800,000 jobs to be created across Europe by 2030. But for this boom to materialise, the Council must now put the economy and the planet first and support these ambitious targets.”
Meadhbh Bolger, resource justice campaigner at Friends of the Earth Europe, said: “Yesterday’s vote gives a strong signal to the Commission that lost ambition on cutting European resource use needs to be restored. It is now up to the whole Parliament and the Council to step up to the plate and keep these raised recycling targets and better measures to prevent waste and incineration.”
MEPs also called for a common EU-wide method of at what point in the recycling process recycling rates can be calculated from. Differences in methodologies across EU member states mean that data is not comparable.
The MEPs’ preferred point for calculating recycling is at the point of the final recycling process. Some countries calculate the rate after, for example, the first sorting of waste.
Guy Thiran is director general of Eurometaux, which represents non-ferrous metal producers and recyclers in Europe.
He said, “Under current rules, EU recycling rates do not reflect exactly what happens to collected and sorted waste. MEPs have sent a strong signal that this situation needs to change.”
The old package had an aspirational target of reducing waste going to landfill by 25% by 2025 and a total ban on the landfill of recyclable and compostable waste in 2030.
That was replaced with a mandatory target of 10% by 2030. MEPs voted to further reduce waste going to landfill by supporting a 5% goal.
This was accompanied by language to discourage incineration of waste as an alternative to it going to landfill.
MEPs also strengthened legislation to halve food waste by 2030 in the EU. Although the wording was toughened up, the target remains voluntary and non-binding.
waste reform: from environmental disaster to economic opportunity
MEPs have the chance to unlock over 800,000 jobs by improving waste management and waste prevention across the EU. If they support progressive waste reform, the benefits will be huge for citizens, businesses and governments, writes Piotr Barczak.
Piotr Barczak is waste policy officer at the European Environmental Bureau.
On 24 January, the European Parliament’s environment committee will vote on the pending legislative proposals on the 2015 Waste Package put forward by the European Commission.
The Waste Package is the main set of legislation accompanying the Circular Economy strategy, which aims to support the transition towards a more sustainable and stronger economy by expanding recycling, reuse and repair.
However, the package has been widely criticised by campaigners and progressive businesses. Despite the announcement by European Commission Vice-President Frans Timmermans that the 2015 Circular Economy Package would be more ambitious than the 2014 proposal, the targets for recycling and reducing landfill waste are weaker. The plan also fails to adequately address waste prevention by repair and reuse, and lacks a legal framework that incentivises prevention.
MEP Simona Bonafè, Rapporteur for the Waste Directive from the Socialists & Democrats group, put forward a new set of proposals in June last year outlining the importance of having stronger targets. In her report, which will be put to a vote on 24 January, she proposes to increase recycling targets for municipal solid waste from the current 65% proposed by the Commission to 70% by 2030. The suggested amendments also include the implementation of an 80% target for the recycling of packaging waste.
An ambitious Waste Package would provide a unique opportunity for EU decision-makers to put Europe back on track towards economic recovery. The European Commission’s own impact assessmentestimated the targets put forward by Bonafè would unlock 580,000 jobs by 2030, as well as €72 billion a year in savings for businesses benefiting from greater resource security. But figures for job creation could go up to 867,000if, on top of the 70% recycling target, the executive adopted better policies for reuse – especially with regards to furniture and textiles.
In addition, a more effective combination of waste management and prevention policies would bring member states closer to achieving their climate change targets by cutting down between 146 and 244 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.
These proposals are badly needed. Today we are far from reaping the full benefits of a circular economy. In Europe, we still burn or bury 50% of the waste we produce, destroying valuable resources that are often imported from overseas at a high price. This outdated model of a linear economy has made member states heavily dependent on imports at the expense of competitiveness for European industries.
It is for this reason that much more is expected from the MEPs gathering in Brussels on 24 January. Legally binding targets for waste prevention are needed just as much as higher recycling targets for waste management. Member states are currently exempt from any legal obligation on food wasteand marine litter, despite their commitment to introducing reduction targets under the Sustainable Development Goals. Such political targets need to be legally anchored to the Waste Package in order to make governments accountable and avoid empty promises.
Furthermore, MEPs should reconsider the time derogations for recycling targets that are granted to certain underperforming member states. This is primarily in the interests of such countries, which would risk being left even further behind. Member states should instead be incentivised to generate less waste by receiving more adequate recycling targets based on their level of waste generation. This way, prevention would be rewarded, rather than wastefulness.
As waste generation becomes increasingly costly from both an economic and environmental perspective, MEPs are called to support a swift and ambitious transition to the circular economy. The benefits are well known – it’s now down to EU decision-makers to put in place the measures necessary to close the loop.
RECORD NUMBER OF ERASMUS+ PARTICIPANTS IN 2015
Figures released on 26 January show that 678,000 Europeans went abroad to study, train, work or volunteer with Erasmus+ in 2015, more than ever before.
26 January 2017 also marks the launch of the From Erasmus to Erasmus+: A Story of 30 years campaign. This Europe-wide campaign of events and activities will celebrate the 30th anniversary of the Erasmus programme, first launched in 1987 and now part of Erasmus+.
The figures are among the findings of the Erasmus+ Annual Report for 2015. Further highlights from the annual report include:
- €2.1 billion invested in the Erasmus+programme in 2015
- 19,600 projects funded with over 69,000 participating organisations
emission trading scheme by numbers
The EU’s Emission Trading Scheme reform took a huge step forward last year when the European Parliament’s Environment Committee voted in favour of MEP Ian Duncan’s report. He talks us through the process and what happens next.
Ian Duncan is an MEP with the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) and represents the Scottish Conservative Party at a domestic level.
Once upon a time, not so far away… well the 15 December in Brussels, the Environment Committee of the European Parliament held its final session of 2016.
It was an extraordinary session, in more ways than one, with only one item of business: to vote on the reform of the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).
The vote had been scheduled to take place the week before, but despite my best efforts the distance between the groups was just too great, and so I postponed the vote.
In truth, the distance was still too great 24 hours before the rescheduled vote, but there was magic in the air that Thursday and by a margin of 41 (53 votes for, five against with seven abstentions) the merry legislators passed the report, so beginning the legislative journey of ETS reform.
As we count down the days to the final parliamentary plenary vote (scheduled for 15 February) I thought it might be interesting to explore the ETS in numbers.
The reform takes shape…
The vote took place on 15 December, which was 518 days after the European Commission first published its proposal, 455 days after I was appointed rapporteur, and 197 days since my report was published, 174 days since I tendered my resignation as rapporteur on ETS reform and 162 days since the chair of the ENVI committee turned down my resignation. (Ah, Brexit… It seems just like yesterday…).
Alongside me, negotiating the reform, were seven MEPs (my shadows and I) representing the eight political groups, together with 14 assistants (who knew far more than the eight of us).
We spent over 40 hours in official session and countless more unofficially on the telephone, in various corridors and occasionally in bars (alcohol may have been taken) to distill the 729 amendments laid against my report into a document compromising 17 amendments, spanning 78 pages and over 20,000 words.
The year of our labour saw Brexit, Trump and the entry into force of the Paris Agreement. It also saw actual labour: S&D shadow Jytte Guteland gave birth to a baby boy. He will be five by the time the reform we have begun actually enters into force.
What was agreed
2.4% – The annual rate by which allowances will be removed from the market (equal to the elimination of 528 million tonnes of CO2) from 2021-30.
This figure represents an increase of 0.2% on the Commission proposal, and means an additional 242 million tonnes of CO2will be removed during the term of the reform, so ensuring the EU meets it ambition of reducing emissions by at least 80% by 2050.
57% – the proportion of allowances to be auctioned by member states (or by the Commission) to provide the money for the Modernisation Fund, the Innovation Fund, and part of the harmonised scheme to compensate for indirect costs.
The ENVI Committee agreed that up to 5% of this share could be transferred to support industry should the number of ‘free allowances’ ever run out (during negotiations it was termed the ‘Duncan mechanism’; I suspect my late mother would have been immensely proud of that fact, even if she didn’t quite understand its significance. I am writing this article on what would have been her 80th birthday).
If the Duncan mechanism is not triggered, or if the full 5% is not needed to compensate industry, up to 200 million additional allowances will be cancelled, so reducing further the surplus of allowances on the market.
100% – the share of revenues from auctioned allowances that member states must use for climate action. At present, member states spend only 80% of the auction revenues on climate projects. Increasing this to 100% will make available a further €120 billion of funding for renewables, energy efficiency and climate mitigation.
1 billion – the number of allowances that will be cancelled during the phase in order to reduce oversupply in the market. Due to the financial crash in 2008 and the related dip in EU industrial production, analysts estimate the market will be oversupplied by roughly 2.5 billion allowances by 2021.
Removing 1 billion of these permits will help restore market balance and deliver a carbon price that incentivises industrial innovation in Europe.
24% – which represents a doubling of the rate of withdrawal of carbon permits from the market, compared to the Commission proposal. The permits will be banked in what is known as the Market Stability Reserve (MSR).
Coupled with the cancellation noted above, this doubling of withdrawal (12 to 24%) will help reduce oversupply in the market and encourage a meaningful carbon price.
100 – the number of sectors that will no longer qualify for free allowances and therefore exit the ‘carbon leakage’ list. The ENVI Committee agreed with the Commission to focus the list on those sectors most at risk of upping sticks and departing the EU, to lands where carbon costs are lower.
0 – the number of new coal fired power plants that can be funded through the ETS funding mechanisms.
MEPs will be asked to endorse the ENVI Committee’s report on 15 February 2017, in a plenary vote. By then it will be only 1,416 days until the actual reform comes into being (and 685 days until the Market Stability Reserve actually starts stabilising the market), and around 5.6 billion tonnes of CO2will have entered the atmosphere
If MEPs endorse my report, then the Parliament will shortly thereafter (the number of days is anyone’s guess) enter into negotiations with the European Council – termed the trialogue, since it is chaired by the European Commission – and the carbon market reform will have taken another step to becoming law.
Easy as one, two, three…