| Author (Person) | Bower, Helen | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Publisher | ProQuest Information and Learning | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Series Title | In Focus | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Series Details | 9.2.02 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Publication Date | 09/02/2002 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Content Type | News, Overview, Topic Guide | In Focus | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
European companies could be faced with large bills in the future following a proposal [COM(2002)17], put forward by the European Commission on 23 January 2002, for a Directive on environmental liability which foresees companies meeting the costs of cleaning up any environmental damage they cause as well as employing preventive measures to avoid environmental damage in the first place. Background The proposal comes nearly a decade after the European Commission first raised the question of remedying environmental damage in a Green Paper to the Council, European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee [COM(93)47 final][link available shortly] in May 1993. In the opening lines of the Green Paper, the European Commission cite the names Seveso, Amoco Cadiz, Sandoz, Corunna and the Braer as examples of major environmental accidents within the European Community. Since then, names such as the Sea Empress, Erika, Baia Mare are all examples of environmental disasters which could be added to the list. Such a list of environmental disasters highlights the need for action in remedying environmental damage, especially as such accidents form only a small part of the damage to the environment in Europe. Every day, air is polluted by factories and vehicles, rivers by waste waters from cities and farms and soil by deposits of hazardous substances. All these activities merit remedial action. Moreover, the European Commission argues that a Union wide system of liability for environmental damage is needed because the use of different systems of civil liability for remedying environmental damage among the Member States can impede the functioning of the single market and distort competition. For example, if industries in some Member States are required to pay the cost of damages, while industries in other Member States are able to avoid these costs, because restoration is not required or the cost falls on the taxpayer, then these industries effectively receive a competitive advantage. Following the publication of the Green Paper in 1993, a Joint Hearing took place with the European Parliament in the same year followed by a Parliament Resolution asking for a Community Directive [OJ C128, 9.5.94, p165] and an Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee in 1994 [OJ C133, 16.5.94, p8]. The Directorate General for Environment presented an internal report to the European Commission at the end of 1995 but this met with stiff opposition, particularly from officials from the 'big three' EU Member States, Germany, the UK and France, although for different reasons. The UK and France questioned the need for an extra legislative burden on industry, while Germany feared its own tough regime could be diluted. After continued hostility to the plan in 1996 and 1997, the European Commission deferred making a decision on future action until further analysis had been carried out and decided instead to prepare a White Paper on the issue to open it up for wider debate. White Paper on Environmental Liability The European Commission published a White Paper on Environmental Liability [COM(2000)66] on 9 February 2000 [IP/00/137] . It aimed to examine how the 'polluter pays' principle, one of the key environmental principles in the EC Treaty, could best be applied to serve the aims of Community environmental policy and how a regime on environmental liability could best be shaped. The White Paper considers five different options for Community action:
It concluded that a Community framework Directive on environmental liability would be the appropriate option in order to provide the most effective means of implementing the environmental principles of the EC treaty. It cites the main reasons for introducing an EC regime as the:
The White Paper also includes proposals for what would be the main features of an EC environmental liability scheme, namely:
The European Commission received over 150 responses to the White Paper from a wide array of interested parties reflecting the broad impact that such a Directive would have across the European Union. The DG Environment has set up a searchable database of all the comments it received on the White Paper with options to search by type of organisation or specific issues. A number of organisations have also separately made available their opinion. Representing environmental interests, the European Environmental Bureau welcomed the White Paper as a step forward in the discussion on environmental liability but criticised the European Commission for adopting a White Paper which was much weaker than previous versions. EEB spokesman, John Hontelez, said,
and EU policy director Christian Hey, added,
Yet while environmental organisations were calling the White Paper too weak, business organisations were saying that in fact the proposals were too tough in terms of the implications for businesses. UNICE, stated in a press release that,
Their fears about costs were echoed by the Union of the Electricity Industry who stated,
The association also highlighted the issues surrounding insurance saying,
Organisations representing the agricultural sector also highlighted the need for a sound insurance market. In their joint response to the White Paper, COPA and COGECA said,
although they generally welcomed and supported the proposals while calling on the European Commission to recognise that,
The White Paper was also the subject of Opinions from the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions and while, the European Parliament has not adopted an official position on the White Paper, its Environment Committee adopted an opinion in September 2000. Following the wide range of responses to the White Paper, the European Commission organised a series of further studies to investigate specific aspects of the proposals and then produced a working document which it invited all interested parties to comment upon. The submissions and comments from interested parties have been made available on the DG Environment website. Latest Proposals Further to the public consultation and the results of the ongoing studies, a legislative proposal [COM(2002)17] was finalised and adopted by the European Commission on 23 January 2002. Margot Wallström, European Commissioner for the Environment, commenting on the adoption said,
The proposal establishes a framework to ensure that future environmental damage - including damage to the biodiversity protected at EU or national level, to the waters regulated by the Water Framework Directive as well as land contamination - is restored or prevented. The proposal provides for public authorities to play an important role in the liability scheme, ensuring that responsible operators undertake themselves or finance the necessary restorative measures in cases of environmental damage. Moreover, public interest groups will be able to require public authorities to act and, if necessary, challenger their decisions before the courts, when their decisions are illegal. The key features of the proposal are:
The European Commission has also published a useful MEMO on frequently asked questions about the proposal for environment liability. To trace the progress of the proposal you can use the following services:
Reaction to the Proposals Bearing in mind, the lengthy lifetime of this issue and the work already carried out by the European Commission to gauge the response of stakeholders and include this in the latest proposals, then a positive reception to it might have been expected. However, there has been considerable crticism from different sectors. Environmental organisations have criticised the decision to exempt polluting activities covered by government permits, Roberto Ferrigno, of the European Environmental Bureau, calling it a 'nonsense' and saying.
They were backed by the World Wide Fund for Nature and Birdlife International. Yet the proposals have not been greeted with more support from the business sector. In a press release about the proposals, UNICE Secretary General, Philippe de Buck, said,
This highlights the key problem facing the European Commission: how to integrate sound environment policies into the overall EU policy framework without impeding areas such as competition and the internal market. In such a controversial atmosphere it is questionable how successful this latest proposal to establish environmental liability will be. The proposal is subject to the co-decision procedure and will therefore be subject to adoption by both the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament. It will begin its legislative journey on 4 March 2002 when it is presented to the Environment Council but bearing in mind that the co-decision procedure usually takes two to three years and once it is adopted Member States will have two years to implement it in national law then there is a strong possibility that several other names will have joined Seveso, Braer, Erika and Baia Mare as examples of environmental disasters before companies begin to pay for keeping the environment clean. Further information within European Sources Online: European Sources Online: Topic Guides:
Further information can be seen in these external links: EU Institutions
Further and subsequent information on the subject of this In Focus can be found by an 'Advanced Search' in European Sources Online by inserting 'environmental' and 'liability' in the keyword field. Helen Bower The European Commission proposed a new Directive on 23 January 2002 on environmental liability which foresees companies meeting the costs of cleaning up any environmental damage they cause as well as employing preventive measures to avoid environmental damage in the first place. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Subject Categories | Environment | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
