Green angle on planning is rejected

Date: 29/05/1997

By Simon Coss

EU GOVERNMENTS appear to have scuppered European Commission plans to ensure environmental impact assessments are extended to large-scale planning projects.

Environment Commissioner Ritt Bjerregaard launched her proposals for EU rules on what she called 'strategic environmental assessments' at the end of last year.

Bjerregaard's idea was to oblige national governments to take account of certain minimum environmental considerations when planning major construction projects such as roads, mining operations, power stations or large-scale rubbish disposal facilities.

But after just one meeting in March, Union governments gave the proposal a resounding thumbs down.

“This proposal is dead. It is not a big priority for any of the governments and in any case there are serious doubts about the legal base for the plan,” said one expert.

The Dutch government decided after the March meeting that there was so little room for manoeuvre that it would not discuss the plan again during its EU presidency, which runs until the end of June. Luxembourg, which takes over the presidency in the summer, has also made it clear it will not make time to debate the proposal during its six-month stint at the Union helm.

The Commission originally put forward its proposals under a Maastricht Treaty article which would have allowed them to be adopted by qualified majority voting, with the European Parliament sharing decision-making powers.

But several member states, notably Spain and the UK, insisted the proposal be based on another paragraph in the treaty requiring unanimous approval.

Experts say national governments are always extremely wary of any attempts to impose EU-level rules on large-scale construction projects. “They see it as a foot in the door by the Commission into town and country planning,” explained one.

Many critics also argue that the Commission should put its own house in order over impact assessment rules before attempting to impose legislation on national governments.

Bjerregaard's plan specifically exempted EU programmes such as the 30-billion-ecu structural funds and Trans-European Network infrastructure projects from the proposed new rules.

“All governments wishing to apply for structural funds have to supply is an 'environmental statement' and the quality of these documents can vary enormously,” complained a seasoned environmental campaigner.

With the regulations for awarding structural fund payments set to be revised in 1999, environmental groups say that they will be pushing the Commission to tighten up its current “lax” approach.