Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-04-Speech-3-284"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020904.9.3-284"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, my colleague, Mrs Wallström, is attending the World Summit on Sustainable Development. Therefore it is an honour for me to participate in this debate on her behalf.
The Commission considers public participation in permit updates covered by Article 13 appropriate. The wording of the common position fails to identify where public participation is deemed to be appropriate, leaving it entirely to the discretion of the Member States. The Commission therefore fully supports Amendment No 15.
Regarding the extension of the public participation provisions to cover other Community legislation plans and programmes which may have a significant effect on the environment, Amendment No 18 proposes extending considerably the scope of Article 2 to cover other Community legislation, plans and programmes, which may have a significant effect on the environment or health. The Commission cannot accept this amendment, nor can it accept related Amendments Nos 1, 2 and 6 to the recitals, for the following reasons. To the extent that the wording refers to public participation in the preparation of Community legislation, the present directive is not the correct legal instrument. In addition, public participation in the preparation of legislation is referred to as soft law under the Aarhus Convention.
In regard to plans and programmes, the amendment would considerably deviate from the original approach to cover clearly identified plans and programmes in the environmental field. It would not provide sufficient legal certainty as to which plans and programmes are covered and would duplicate measures in different pieces of legislation.
In respect of plans and programmes in other sectors likely to have significant environmental effects, Directive 2001/42/EC on strategic environmental assessment already incorporates measures of particular relevance. This directive provides for an environmental assessment of relevant plans and programmes in the integration sectors. As part of the assessment, public participation will take place in line with the Aarhus Convention.
I turn now to access to justice. The Commission cannot accept Amendment No 10 providing for access to justice in relation to plans and programmes covered by the directive, or Amendment No 5 on the related recital.
Article 9(2) of the Aarhus Convention explicitly requires access to justice in relation to projects that may have a significant effect on the environment. This is dealt with under the common position.
In relation to plans and programmes, access to justice is not explicitly required. It would also be inconsistent to apply it to certain plans and programmes when it is not provided for in the case of those covered by the directive on strategic environmental assessment.
However, the Commission is preparing a legislative proposal on access to justice to fully implement the third pillar of the Aarhus Convention. In the framework of that proposal, the content of Amendment No 10 could more appropriately be addressed in a horizontal way.
On the amendments concerning information about the outcome of public participation and practical information concerning administrative and judicial review, the Commission would like to point out that the provisions on public participation have to be practicable to allow smooth implementation in the different administrative systems of the Member States.
Amendments Nos 7, 13, 14 and 16 require the competent authority to make reasonable efforts to reply to the public and to ensure that information provided about decisions taken includes practical direction concerning the procedure for seeking review. The common position already incorporates the obligation to inform the public about the final decision and the underlying reasons and considerations and provides for appropriate information to be made available on the review procedures. Requiring more would constitute a disproportionate administrative burden and hamper effective public participation. The Commission therefore cannot accept those amendments.
The first meeting of the parties to the Aarhus Convention on access to information, public participation and access to justice in environmental matters will take place at the end of October. The Community will not yet be in a position to participate as a party to that convention. We can, however, show that we take our commitments seriously and make good progress in adopting the implementing legislation.
To summarise our position on the amendments: the Commission can accept Amendments Nos 15 and 19. Amendments Nos 3, 4, 11 and 12 can be accepted in principle. The Commission cannot accept Amendments Nos 1, 2, 5 to 10, 13, 14, nor Amendments Nos 16 to 18.
To conclude, I would like to emphasise that it is in our common interest, which is the interest of the European citizens, to have this directive enter in force swiftly so that public participation can be fully integrated into administrative practice.
This common position deals with the second pillar of the convention, public participation in environmental decision-making. In addition, other recent Community legislation already incorporates the principles of the Aarhus Convention concerning public participation and the common position on access to environmental information is under consideration.
The Commission will present the remaining proposals, notably on access to justice and the application of the convention to Community institutions, by the end of the year.
The present common position, with one exception, provides a good basis to enable this directive on public participation to be adopted fairly soon. The Commission is happy that the rapporteur and the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy as a whole share this positive view and also support the Commission's position on the outstanding issue.
On the main amendments tabled for the vote tomorrow, the Commission's position is as follows.
First of all, public participation in the updating of permits under the IPPC directive. I will start with the exception where the Commission is not happy with the common position. Under the Aarhus Convention, public participation is as a rule required, not only for the issue but also for the updating of permits for the activities covered. This was provided for in the Commission's proposal concerning permits under the IPPC Directive, where such updating is a key revision.
The common position largely restricted this requirement and its wording leaves a wide discretion to the Member States and the competent authorities in charge of updating permits. This will lead to widely divergent practice and legal uncertainty and will potentially mean that public participation is possible only in a few cases when permits are being updated, rather than being the rule.
Amendment No 15 requires public participation for the most relevant cases of permit updates, which are those covered by Article 13 of the IPPC directive. While the Commission proposal included permit updates as such, the amendment is in line with Article 6(10) of the Aarhus Convention, which allows for the rules on public participation to apply updates where appropriate."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples