Environment Committee debates IPPC Revision

The Council common position for the IPPCⁱ recast has suffered a blow at the discussion of the Rapporteur’s draft recommendation for the second reading in Parliament’s Environment Committee on 17 March 2010.

The Parliament’s Rapporteur Holger Krahmer (ALDE, Germany) on the proposed IPPC Recast criticised the Council’s Common Position for not taking on board the first reading proposal for a European Safety Network (ESN) and said that reaching an agreement between Parliament and Council is going to be difficult. He also asked the European Commission to present a report on the situation of implementation of BATⁱ (Best Available Techniques) and their environmental effects; the Rapporteur thought that the new legislation should be more stringent on any deviations from BAT.

Shadow Rapporteur Elisabetta Gardini (EPP, IT) disagreed with many aspects of the draft report. She said that Parliament could not go back to the first reading, pointing out that the Common Position was adopted with no votes against and only 4 abstentions. The new ESN proposal for minimum requirements for problematic sectors, she said, was not an effective or efficient way to achieve necessary goals and would discriminate against various sectors and between Member States. The EPP group is currently split between Ms Gardini’s view - pro-Council Common Position and flexibility – and Mr Krahmer’s pro-ESN and stricter derogations position.

Mr Krahmer has, however, gained support from the Shadow Rapporteurs Äsa Westlund (S&D, Sweden) and Bas Eickhout (Green, Netherlands).

European Conservatives and Reformists Shadow Rapporteur Martin Callanan (UK) did not agree to change criteria for derogations and Shadow Joao Ferreira (Confederal Group of the European United Left - Nordic Green Left, Portugal) pointed out that, while there was a need for clear criteria for derogations, this must take account of the unique characteristics of Member States.

Shadows overall agreed on deletion the recital on SO2 and NOxⁱ trading.

The Commission supports Mr Krahmer’s belief that exceptions should not be extended. However, the Commission had previously stated that the Council position is acceptable since it is consistent and builds upon the Commission's proposal. It objected to the Council’s position on the ground that, in the comitology procedure, a delegated act (with more power to the European Commission), not an implementing act should be necessary (“conferral of powers”).

Industry has overall supported the Council position as it recognizes the need to maintain flexibility as well as the integrated approach for the setting of ELVs in permits, and has opted for less comitology measures than those proposed by the European Commission and the European Parliament.

A one-size-fits-all approach as the ESN is rejected by industry and Member States in general and even the European Commission considered it unworkable at 1st reading.

The Parliament's Environment Committee will vote on the proposal on 27 April. Trialogue talks between MEPs, Member States and the European Commission will begin shortly after. A plenary vote in Strasbourg is scheduled for July.