MEPs set to play tough over vehicle emissions

Date: 03/04/1997

By Michael Mann

MEPS are expected to demand a tough approach to vehicle emission limits when the full Parliament votes on the European Commission's proposals for the first time next week.

They are likely to endorse the broad lines of the Parliament's environment committee's approach despite heavy lobbying from both the car and oil industries, which claim the committee's amendments would be cripplingly expensive and make very little difference to overall air quality.

The Parliament's tough stance is being seen as an initial bargaining position on an issue where it shares decision-making powers with the Council of Ministers.

“I think the reports on emissions and fuel standards will get the majority they need. There is a feeling that there is a need for real changes, but the first reading will also represent a first bargaining position,” said British Conservative MEP Caroline Jackson.

A spokesman for the Socialist Group said it was difficult to predict the precise outcome of next week's vote, but stressed there was “a consensus on tightening standards”.

However, a number of imponderables remain. Unusually, it seems that some MEPs are more likely to vote according to nationality rather than political colour.

“The French, Spanish and Italians will probably wake up to the potential expense that these tighter standards would mean for their car sectors,” said Jackson, suggesting the momentum behind the committee's changes to the proposals came from German industry, which already applies more stringent rules than most southern European manufacturers.

Among other changes, the committee voted to make the non-binding limits set by the Commission for 2005 mandatory.

Jackson also suggested there was an element of muscle flexing in the committee's position, reflecting MEPs' anger that they were excluded from the 'Auto-Oil Programme' on which the proposals to cut emissions and the planned fuel quality standards are based.

But there is also anger within the industry over the way the plans are being treated by the various EU bodies. “The car industry cannot be used in a political power play between the institutions,” said an official at the carmakers' lobby ACEA.

He insisted that the ideas contained in German Socialist Bernd Lange's report on emission standards and French Green Noël Mamère's report on fuel standards “overshot the changes necessary to arrive at the required air quality targets”, claimed some of the requirements were “not technically feasible” and maintained that it was “clearly a political decision”.

Carmakers claim that the Parliament has moved away from the clear mandate given to the Commission in drafting its plans - that measures should be based on their cost-effectiveness - and is moving towards the disputed “best available technology” approach.

ACEA's sentiments were largely echoed by Michel Flohic, of the oil industry lobby Europia, which was felt to have emerged relatively unscathed from the Auto-Oil Programme.

“The committee's amendments would do little to improve air quality while increasing the cost massively,” he said.

Europia claims the revised proposals would cost around 60 billion ecu over 15 years, compared with the 11.5-billion-ecu bill for the Commission's proposals.

“We believe European politicians will understand it is bad for everybody in the current economic climate to require industry to invest in measures which produce such limited effects,” said Flohic.