Brussels, 04/11/2015 (Agence Europe) - Right from the announcement of how it was to be structured, environmental NGOs feared that the Juncker Commission would not be environmentally minded (see EUROPE 11152). One year on and their fears have proved to be justified.
That is the tough assessment made on Monday 2 November by a group of environmental and climate NGOs: “a lost year”, according to CEE Bankwatch Network, CAN Europe (Climate Action Network Europe), the European Environmental Bureau (EEB), Friends of the Earth Europe (FoE), Greenpeace and Health & Environment Alliance. And the Commission's 2016 work programme, which claims to address the concerns of citizens, does little to reassure them. For it to be so, the NGOs say, there needs to be a significant shift in priorities towards sustainable development, with benefits for the environment, health, employment and prosperity.
“The dieselgate scandal shows that a lax approach to environmental protection comes at a high cost to our health, the economy and the environment we depend on. The Commission's first vice-president, Frans Timmermans, has sustainable development in his job title, but this has not manifested itself in concrete policy action. Without a radical change of course, the corporate capture of EU policy-making will lead to more scandals like dieselgate and more irreversible damage”, the NGOs warn. Given the environmental and climate challenges to be met, they set out the areas in which the Commission's stance has been particularly disappointing, including:
Climate. Despite the growing momentum around COP 21, the Commission has failed to develop proposals to ratchet up the EU's 2030 targets. The NGOs make clear their view that the target of a reduction of at least 40% in the EU's greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 compared with 1990 levels is below the EU's fair share of the global effort to tackle climate change, while renewable energy and energy efficiency targets (at least 27%) “remain woefully weak”. Reform of the emissions trading scheme does not resolve the chronic oversupply of emission credits. They criticise the Commission for not ensuring that the financial tools at its disposal (the European Investment Bank, the Juncker investment plan and the EU's regional development funds) will steer billions of euros in taxpayer money towards helping Europe meet its long-term goal of a clean energy economy.
Protection of nature. The Commission has come under fire from civil society and nine European governments which called on it to maintain the habitats and birds directives by making sure they are properly implemented, rather than considering revising them (see EUROPE 11420).
TTIP. The secretive trade talks with the US have so far “focused on granting privileges to big business at the expense of environmental, health and social rights protection”, state the NGOs (see EUROPE 11419).
Air pollution. Despite the severity of air pollution, which kills more than 400,000 people in Europe every year, the Commission has “defended a weak proposal on air quality”.
GMOs. Juncker's commitment to improve democratic accountability in the approvals of GM food and feed has proved to be “an empty promise”. Instead of taking action to reform the EU's approval system, the Commission tabled “a proposal so unworkable that it was rejected by the European Parliament” (see EUROPE 11420).
Circular economy. The withdrawal at the end of 2014 of the previous Commission's legislative package, which included targets to reduce waste and improve recycling, “has been a year of unnecessary delay”, with a new proposal due to be released in December.
Chemicals. The system for phasing out highly toxic chemicals from industrial processes and consumer products has been painfully slow. The Commission has come under fire from its own chemicals agency and EU member states for failing to speed up the process. The NGOs accuse the Commission of watering down EU restrictions on chemicals, under pressure from the United States and so that the TTIP agreement can be reached. The Commission has also been strongly criticised for blocking legislation that has been awaited since 2013 to ban endocrine disrupting chemicals.
Deregulation. The NGOs accuse the Commission of deregulating under the guise of better regulation.
Sustainable development. In the view of the NGOs, the Commission is conducting a “Cappuccino policy”: a lot of coffee (economic dimension), if things get better some milk (the social dimension), and if they get even better some chocolate (the environmental dimension). (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)