Summary of hearing of Janez Potočnik –Environment
Resource efficiency, biodiversity and an effective implementation and enforcement of existing environmental legislation are the main issues for Janez Potočnik, Commissioner-designate for Environment, he told MEPs during his hearing. He said that a holistic approach is particularly necessary for the environment since many issues overlap with other responsibilities and interests.
Members of the committee on the environment, public health and food safety questioned Mr Potočnik on issues such as the EU water policy, the implementation of REACH, nanotechnologies, the soil-directive, simplification of environmental legislation, targets for resource-efficiency and Natura 2000.
Put environmental questions higher on the political agenda
Questioned by Linda McAvan (S&D, UK) on what legacy he wanted after 5 years, Potočnik said he wanted the environment to be “higher on the political agenda” and to ensure “the economy goes hand in hand with the environment”. Asked what he would answer to those wanting to put jobs first, he said “by investing in environment we are putting the jobs first”. He said predictable and long term positions were needed if business was to accept them. Answering Sabine Wils’s (GUE/NGL, DE) question he said the holistic approach he intended would in some cases mean a market based approach; in other cases regulations.
Paul Nuttall (EFD, UK) argued that it was not proven that global warming is man made. The Commissioner-designate answered that even if this were the case – and this was not his opinion – the policies envisaged should be the same and that he “hopes that we are politically responsible enough to act early enough and not make the same mistake as regarding the financial crisis”.
Implementation and enforcement of legislation
He agreed with Anja Weisgerber (EPP, DE), that differing implementation of directives in different countries means there is not always a level playing field. He added that the better information should be made available on this issue, aiming to ensure a level playing field for all, but taking account of regional differences, if necessary.
Asked by Chris Davies (ALDE, UK) and several other MEPs how he would enforce implementation of environmental legislation by Member States, he answered, that “what has been adopted, needs to be fully implemented”. His legal role would be to enforce adopted legislation; on the other hand he would help Member States to exchange good practices.
Answering Julie Girling (ECR, UK) he said that implementation of existing legislation would be high on his agenda but that he did not plan a moratorium on new rules in cases where full implementation is not achieved.
Simplification and impact assessment are needed
Answering Holger Krahmer (ALDE, DE) on a possible reduction of bureaucracy and regulation he said that “un-implementable and costly legislation would be in no one’s interest”, but that on the other hand everything for sustainability needed to be done. He said there would not be any new legislation without an impact assessment but “in the impact assessment the voice of the environment should be very strong”.
Probably during the second half of his mandate he would, he said, focus more on smarter regulation and simplification of existing legislation with the idea of it being implementable and as simple as possible without lowering standards.
Resource efficiency – targets could be considered
Questioned by Satu Hassi (Greens/EFA, FI) on probable targets on resource efficiency, he answered that “the concept of resource efficiency will be central to my approach”, but “whenever we discuss setting targets we need a careful approach”. The ultimate concern would be to reduce the environmental impact, and he would consider setting targets, but the question would be first and foremost how to set targets.
Answering Justas Vincas Paleckis (S&D, LT) question, he said the goal should not be less waste but no waste while producing and using products.
Biodiversity/Natura 2000 – no change of legislation, but better implementation
Mr Potočnik agreed with Gerben-Jan Gebrandy (ALDE, NL) that the 2010 target on biodiversity is a failure and promised to present at the end of 2010 a new biodiversity action plan. Within this plan, economic aspects should be taken into account.
On a question by Ester de Lange (EPP, NL) on the future of the Natura 2000 legislation, he said that he had no intention of changing existing legislation. It would be more important to implement it, to fill the gaps, such as on the soil directive, to increase knowledge and to adapt a holistic approach, also taking account of the Common Agriculture Policy, the Common Fisheries Policy and the Structural Funds.
REACH and nanotechnology
Asked by Carl Schlyter (Greens/EFA, SV) on the implementation of the REACH chemicals legislation, he said that the implementation would mean re-negotiation. He had plans the chemicals agency in Helsinki together with Antonio Tajani, Commissioner-designate for industry andentrepreneurship, to give a clear sign that “we want to implement what has been agreed”.
Answering Asa Westlund (S&D, SV) on nanotechnologies, he said that REACH would not be enough in this regard and that we should be very careful; the first objective should be safety.
Soil directive is of EU interest
Ms Weisgerber and Vittorio Prodi (ALDE, IT) asked about the soil directive, he said that he “would not like to see subsidiarity as an excuse for inaction” and that the soil directive would be an issue of EU interest.
Water policy
Asked by Richard Seeber (EPP, AT) about EU water policy he said that he did not intend any major renewal of the existing legislation, since it first needed to be implemented. Much legislation existed other than the water framework directive – not everything needed to be settled via that route. The question should be dealt with together with colleagues of other Commission departments, he said.
