Commission calls for speedier legislation but fails to impress with integration strategy

In a communication on single market and the environment the Commission criticised the slow development of environmental legislation and stressed the need to make the best possible use of existing legislative instruments to ensure that they are as user-friendly as possible.

The communication describes the principles already in use by the Commission to ensure the free movement of goods and environmental protection, and sums up the Community’s experience to date. It identifies some of the more promising ways in which these two areas of Community policy can strengthen each other, in areas such as standardisation, public contracts, environmental labelling, transport and energy.

The European Environmental Bureau (EEB), the largest federation of environmental organisations in Europe, reacted with disappointment to the launch of the document. It call upon the coming Commission to come with a better document before the big end-of-the-year Helsinki Summit, where Europe’s leaders have to agree on a sustainable development strategy for the coming years.
The Commission says its document suggests a certain number of key initiatives for future progress towards making environmental and economic objectives even more compatible:

Lukewarm reception

EEB said that after a year and a half of internal work in the Commission, it expected

a critical analysis of how the EU Single Market, created in 1992, had affected environmental problems. EEB also had expected progressive proposals on how to make sure that the objective of sustainable development and adequate environmental protection would be set on, at least, the same level of priority as the single market. According to EEB “the Communication is only listing a number of future, not ambitious, activities it could undertake”.

John Hontelez, Secretary General of the EEB said: “This document shows that whereas the Commission tries to accommodate environmental interests, it does not want to question the primacy of the internal market. In this way environmental policies of individual member states or local authorities, wanting to go further than what is agreed at EU level, always risk a veto for commercial reasons. Given the persistence and growth of several environmental problems, it is time to realise a real balance between internal market objectives and the protection of the environment”.