The draft European Parliament own-initiative report on water resilience (see EUROPE 13570/5) by rapporteur Thomas Bajada (S&D, Maltese) was intended to be binding, but difficult negotiations between the political groups have watered it down considerably ahead of the first votes in the European Parliament Environment Committee on Tuesday 8 April.
With its own-initiative report, the Parliament is seeking to influence the European Commission ahead of the publication of its ‘European Strategy for Water Resilience’, due in the spring.
For example, the political groups agreed to ask the European Commission to create a “separate fund dedicated to water resilience as part of the EU’s long-term post-2027 budget”. There is an “urgent” need to strengthen water resilience and water management, say MEPs, in order to “guarantee a sustainable supply of fresh water for people, the economy and the environment”.
The Parliament also reiterates the EU’s 2030 objective “to restore coastal, marine and freshwater ecosystems”, but this compromise amendment defended by the S&D, Renew Europe, the Greens/EFA and The Left is not supported by the EPP and is likely to be rejected during the vote in the Environment Committee on Tuesday 8 April.
The general approach of the strategy will have to be “transversal”, according to MEPs, by being integrated into all European policies.
By pointing out that the strategy should contribute to achieving “good chemical status of water bodies, as required by the Water Framework Directive”, the MEPs on the Environment Committee are, for example, building a bridge with the revision of the REACH regulation on chemical substances, which the Commission will submit at the end of 2025.
Calls have been made to establish comprehensive EU-wide quality standards for all PFAS in groundwater and surface water; it is stressed that these updates to the relevant directives are essential to ensure water quality and achieve good chemical status of water bodies, as required by the Water Framework Directive.
Water reuse, desalination, the use of basins, the circular economy, renewable energy, nature-based solutions and innovation have been identified as solutions for guaranteeing water quality and quantity.
In the report, MEPs call for the “phasing out of forever chemicals (PFAS), which have been shown to cause concern for human health and the environment - starting with consumer goods”, but are no longer calling for a complete ban, as requested by MEPs from the Greens/EFA, The Left and Renew Europe.
Moreover, the binding dimension of the text sought by its Socialist rapporteur Thomas Bajada has disappeared from the revised version of paragraph 7. The sectoral targets to be set for “rational water use and water abstraction” are no longer binding, following intense debate with the European People’s Party.
A paragraph identifying agriculture as “the main source of pressure on surface water and groundwater” has also been deleted. Thomas Bajada explained that this was due to “water use and pollution caused by the intensive use of nutrients and pesticides” and that the agricultural sector is “the largest net consumer of water in the EU23”.
Another cause of pollution, the industrial sector, is less singled out than some political groups had hoped. Amendments tabled by S&D and The Left called for the regulation of industrial discharges into water. On the contrary, an amendment specifies that “industrial activities and agricultural production require water to produce their finished products or to support production activities”.
These changes to Thomas Bajada’s report have been made at a time when the ‘European Green Deal’ has become more than ever a bogeyman for the European right. Reference to it has been deleted from the text. Instead of calling for “full implementation of EU Green Deal legislation”, the draft own-initiative report now calls for “implementation of EU environmental legislation”. (Original version in French by Florent Servia)