Brussels, 12/01/2004 (Agence Europe) - Last week, the European Parliament organised a hearing in Brussels on the drawing up of an EU strategy for waste prevention and recycling. The Commission's guidelines on the subject were unveiled in a Communication published in May 2003 (see EUROPE of 28 May) and were used as the structure of the public consultation on the document (in November) and the start of MEPs' work. This will lay the groundwork for legislation the Commission is aiming to publish in the summer to reduce waste, cut the use of natural resources and increase the proportion of waste that can be recycled.
From the start, Karl-Heinz Florenz called for the European Parliament to have codecision powers for the adoption of the future waste policy. Summarising contributions to the hearing, he noted there was consensus that the strategy needed to take equal account of ecological, business and social issues while respecting the three pillars of sustainable development, and it should be closely linked to the European strategy for the sustainable use of resources and the Integrated Product Policy (IPP). But views diverge when it comes to setting quantitative targets for waste reduction, the introduction of negotiable certificates on the waste market (based on the European carbon trading system for greenhouse gas emissions) and the setting of quotas according to type of material. The participants felt more information and pilot studies were required to test the effectiveness of these options.
At the launch of the hearing, Environment Commissioner Margot Wallström stressed the urgent need to take action. She explained that these days, every citizen of the EU produces some 10 kg of waste a week, compared with 6 kg in 1990. The trend is going in the wrong direction and has to be changed, she commented, adding that the strategy being considered by the Commission was a vital supplement to the legislation brought in over the last four years (on electrical and electronic waste, mining, transporting waste, packaging waste and collecting and recycling batteries). The hearing on the Commission's Communication revealed that the options outlined had been well received, said Wallström. Overall, feedback called for a policy of waste prevention, but without making concrete suggestions. There was recognition that the EU could play a role in promoting ecofriendly design, although preventing and recycling remain under the chief responsibility of the Member States. Ecologically and business friendly recycling should be encouraged and the IPP should apply to all types of waste. Everyone recognised the need to clarify existing directives but disagreed on how waste should be defined. Some players stressed the need to improve the application of current legislation, a view shared by Margot Wallström. She said she was counting on the Member States to take their responsibilities seriously, and on the European Parliament and the Council to define the most urgent and most consensual measures to flesh out the future strategy. She said meetings were being organised of experts and the various players. Marianne Klingbeil of the Commission (DG Environment) said that establishing standards should be a priority for enlarged Europe and it would be a good idea to consider whether more binding measures should be taken to clarify areas of uncertainty in the revised directives to be brought in.
Pat the Cope Gallagher, Irish environment minister, who chairs the Environment Council, confirmed the Irish Presidency's commitment to continuing the Lisbon Process and said that better waste management was a vital test for sustainable development. Current policies and practices are no longer able to meet the challenge of modern production, modern consumption and the choices of contemporary life, he said, pleased that the Commission had put forward innovative solutions for establishing a range of measures so vital in the enlarged Europe. Asserting that greater emphasis should be put on product lifecycles, the Presidency said it had identified priority areas needing to be looked into, like waste prevention along with targets and standards, economic incentives and the responsibility of producers and manufacturers. These priorities would be the focus of the Environment Council in Waterford, Ireland, in May for the adoption of conclusion on the Commission's Communication.
On behalf of European business, Fabrizio d'Adda, President of UNICE's environment working group, said that under the 6th Action Programme for the Environment, waste management could not be taken separately from resources and products. He called for a redefinition of the relationship between horizontal processes (like waste management) and vertical processes (like water and land management) in order to improve legislation and even scrap some rules. He said that any item of legislation should be subject to an impact study with regard to business to ensure that the legislation contributed to meeting the Lisbon objectives. Priorities should be set, he said, in terms of what it is possible to achieve with regard to good waste management, and that harmonised rules were the key instrument for reducing waste and an alternative to national measures. He warned against the setting of new recycling targets, saying it was simply not possible for some materials, and expressed doubt about the validity of a system of tradable certificates (being considered by the Commission) and the utility of extending the IPPC directive (Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control) to all recycling operations, calling for comparative studies to be organised to look at the cost of producing products that generate waste and product which do not with a view to better defining responsibilities. This idea was lambasted by Karl-Heinz Florenz. The MEP exclaimed that some people walked across Europe in training shoes, while others were wearing lead boots.
In the view of Rudolf Alsdorf, director of a German SME specialising in waste management and cleaning of cities, it is vital that the responsibility of manufacturers is clearly laid down and that all recycling potential is made the most of, not neglecting compost. He also noted the importance of liberalising the recycling industry, which is more ecological and profitable than incineration or landfill, and insisted that the same rules should apply to all, to avoid a situation whereby waste is exported from one Member State to another. Doreen Fedrigo, of the UK NGO Waste Watch, called for clear waste prevention targets (reducing the volumes of waste produced by 20% by 2010 and 50% by 2030). She hoped to see legislation introduced covering the reduction of waste accompanied by application measures and for current legislation to be adapted without challenging the definition of the waste framework directive.