By a very large majority (588 votes in favour, 23 against, 66 abstentions), the European Parliament voted on Tuesday 19 February in Strasbourg, in favour of reusing treated wastewater for agricultural irrigation, as long as it is safe, to save resources and to counter water scarcity.
It largely followed the position of the rapporteur, Simona Bonafé (S&D, Italy) on the proposal for a regulation establishing: - minimum quality standards for reclaimed water; - obligations for production, distribution and storage operators; - risk management measures (see EUROPE 12177).
MEPs rejected the parliamentary committee's amendment which would have made reclaimed water plant operators responsible for any possible contamination of the resource.
On the other hand, an amendment by the EFDD group was adopted requesting that, one year after the entry into force of the Regulation, the Commission adopt delegated acts to incorporate into the text a method for measuring the presence of microplastics in reclaimed water which may be subject to additional requirements.
The text provides for reclaimed and treated water to be used to irrigate food crops, processed food crops and non-food crops. The Commission will have to assess within five years whether the reclaimed water can be used for other purposes.
MEPs believe that in the meantime, Member States may allow reclaimed water to be used in other ways provided that human health, animals and the environment are thoroughly protected.
According to Simona Bonafè, the security of water supply in Europe is a concern for at least 50% of the population and, while the Water Framework Directive mentions the proper management of water resources, so far there are no clear rules.
"We could potentially reuse 6.6 billion cubic metres of water by 2025, compared to the current 1.1 billion per year," she said.
Most MEPs considered that this regulation will provide a concrete solution to water scarcity, a phenomenon exacerbated by climate change. Maria Lidia Senra Rodríguez (GUE/NGL, Spain) deplored the fact that the processing is in the hands of private operators when, according to her, "such a critical activity must be in the hands of public authorities". Peter Liese (EPP, Germany) would have preferred a directive. (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)