Brussels, 22/03/2013 (Agence Europe) - “Yes” to simplified environmental impact assessments (EIAs) before authorisation of projects but “no” to red tape. That was the message put across by EU environment ministers on Thursday 21 March at their first policy debate on the Commission's proposal of October 2012, aimed at revising the directive on environmental impact assessments prior to the authorisation of certain public and private projects (Directive 85/337/EEC, known as the EIA Directive), in order to streamline and increase the quality of procedures.
Ministers were invited to take a stance on the suitability of creating a one-stop shop to allow coordinated assessment or joint procedures when several EIAs are required, to define more specific criteria to make assessment mandatory for certain projects, and to create a system of accredited experts.
All recognised the need to update this 25-year old directive but the measures proposed by the Commission raised many concerns and were deemed unsuitable for attaining the objective of simplification.
Several delegations, such as that of Germany, felt that joint procedures should be optional. There was a majority view towards considering that the procedures proposed were not compatible with the national assessment systems and many felt that flexibility was required.
Many ministers feared an over-sized burden of administrative charges.
Summarising the debate, Phil Cogan, who chaired the session, noted that ministers had placed emphasis on simplification rather than on improving quality. He said he hoped they would be able to reconcile quality with rationalised procedures.
Speaking on behalf of the Commission, Janez Potocnik observed that changes would be inevitable. Some, he said, fear that the one-stop shop will entail additional costs, but it seeks user-friendliness. Some fear administrative charges, but unless the environment is integrated into projects clearly and predictably from the outset, there will be no predictability for project managers and investors. This is the ideal recipe for bringing inefficiency and additional costs. Many member states have asked for flexibility through respect for subsidiarity. And yet ex-post compliance must be achieved. A clear system is needed and, the commissioner said, he sincerely hoped to continue discussion. He went on to invite member states to make concrete suggestions for improving the proposal, while recognising that an agreement will not be easy. The vote in parliamentary committee is scheduled for July this year. (AN/transl.jl)