Water UK

Getting the environment right in Europe: round one

31/05/07

It is complex because how confident can we be that a single number or two numbers (which will sometimes differ depending on whether we talk about inland or 'other waters') will be adequate protection? And it is certainly even more confusing when it comes to sediments and biota – EQS or not EQS - that has been the question! And the issue is not solved yet and might not be for quite awhile.

This thorny issue of priority substances was subject to a lot of creative – albeit sometimes pragmatic and constructive – thinking in the European Parliament. From an original legislative text which contained only five main articles and two Annexes, the European Parliament tabled more than 200 amendments.

There was certainly good intention to ensure that the environment would be adequately protected. For instance, the majority of the Members of the European Parliament defended the need to have both environmental quality standards and emission controls – emission controls for both point source (e.g. industry) and diffuse sources (e.g. agriculture and urban pollution) are paramount for the water industry – it means less treatment used, more energy saved, less carbon impacts and overall, a better environment and our water resources will be better protected.

Members of the European Parliament were also very sensible when they decided to support the provisions relating to the mixing zones – so bizarre and so very British (if I may be so bold! I’m French) – yet so crucial and critical for the water industry. Contrary to many comments we could hear, mixing zones are not a right to pollute but an integral part and temporary measure that will assist in complying with the EQS.

So far, so good, we could say. However one can wonder what is the reason behind the European Parliament’s adoption of an additional list of 28 substances that the European Commission is requested to review over only 12 months? Is it simply the result of a compromise between political groups? Is it a genuine incentive to urge the European Commission and the governments to accelerate the pace of the current slow movement towards a better water environment?

Despite this attempted wake-up call from the European Parliament, there is still a long way to go. The negotiations will most likely continue for another year, and the European Commission is deemed to review the adopted list of substances at least every four years. Therefore one can expect further lively discussions. Yet, the good news is that we might be heading towards a different process which will be more adapted to new realities than having directives ‘written in stone’ that we are still implementing! This process might reconcile the environment, politics, science and business.

Ends

For more information contact: Gaetane Suzenet, European Affairs Adviser, 0032 2706 4092