2016/2251(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Notes with concern that the transposition of the Environmental Liability Directive into national liability systems has not resulted in a level playing field and that the minimum standards set by the ELD are interpreted differently across the EU leading to implementation deficiencies;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that activities w~~hich have the potential to cause significant damage to biodiversity and the environment~~ith significant potential negative impacts on biodiversity and environment, such as the pipeline transport of dangerous substances, mining, and invasive alien species, are currently not covered by the requirement ofor strict liability; in particular for biodiversity damage, the Annex III activities do not sufficiently cover the sectors with potential damage;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that there are activities which have the potential to cause significant damage to biodiversity and the environment and which are currently not covered by the requirement of strict liability;

Amendment 12 #

Daciana Octavia SÂRBU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Note~~Regrets that activities which have the potential to cause significant damage to biodiversity and the environment are currently not covered by the requirement of strict liability;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Note~~Regrets that activities which have the potential to cause significant damage to biodiversity and the environment are currently not covered by the requirement of strict liability;

Amendment 14 #

Mireille D'ORNANO, Jean-François JALKH, Sylvie GODDYN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that not all activities which have the potential to cause significant damage to biodiversity and the environment are currently ~~not~~ covered by the requirement of strict liability;

Amendment 15 #

Jørn DOHRMANN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Notes that the European Commission has concluded that there are broad differences among the Member States in the application of the Directive and that it has not succeeded in creating a level playing field across the EU;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Points out that traditional civil law liability arrangements barely lend themselves to environmental liability, given the nature of what is at stake;

Amendment 17 #

Daciana Octavia SÂRBU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Recalls that a lack of obligation for operators to have financial security regarding environmental liability may prevent the full compensation of costs in the event of a serious incident;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Calls for any operator benefitting from the carrying out of activities to be also liable for any environmental damage or pollution caused by those activities;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Notes that in Article 1, the framework of environmental liability should be broadened to include environmental rehabilitation and ecological restoration to the baseline condition after occupational activities have ended, even when environmental damage is caused by activities or emissions expressly authorised by the competent authorities;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Notes that due to the discretionary powers awarded in the ELD, its implementation in Member States has not been coordinated and has lacked harmonization and effectiveness;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 f (new)

2 f. Recalls that the definitions of environmental damage in Article 1 (a), (b) and (c) have proven to be unclear; calls for their redefining to cover all damages to the environment;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)

2 e. Calls on the Commission, in the context of the revision of the ELD, to include 'ecosystems' and 'recreational uses and amenities of the environment' in the definitions of 'environmental damage' and 'natural resource' of Article 2;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2 c. Calls on the Commission, through the revision of Article 3, to ensure the application of the Directive to environmental damage caused by any occupational activity and to ensure strict producer liability;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

~~3. In the context of a review of the ELD, considers it paramount to extend strict liability to non-Annex III activities for all environmental damage in order to render the legislation more effective;~~deleted

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. In the context of a review of the ELD, considers it paramount to extend strict liability to non-Annex III activities for all environmental damage with significant adverse effects in order to render the legislation more effective;

Amendment 25 #

Mireille D'ORNANO, Jean-François JALKH, Sylvie GODDYN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. In the context of a review of the ELD, considers it ~~paramount~~a priority to extend strict liability to non-Annex III activities for all environmental damage ~~in order to render the legislation more effective~~to improve the effectiveness of the legislation; in the interest of clarity of the law recommends to the Commission to remove the Annex III;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. In the context of a review of the ELD, considers it paramount to extend strict liability to non-Annex III activities for all environmental damage in order to render the legislation more effective; points out that court rulings have to be consistent, as it might otherwise seem that that jurisdictions were setting precedents clashing from one case to the next;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. In the context of a review of the ELD, considers it paramount to extend strict liability to non-Annex III activities for all environmental damage in order to render the legislation more effective as it could provide an incentive for operators to properly manage the risk of their activities and it would promote the polluter-pays principle;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. In the context of a review of the ELD, considers it paramount to think about extending strict liability ~~to non-Annex III activities for all environmental damage~~for environmental damage by adding to Annex III in order to render the legislation more effective;

Amendment 29 #

Jørn DOHRMANN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Notes that a few Member States appear to make use of the ELD relatively frequently for environmental damage incidents, while others appear to apply national legislation for environmental damage incidents instead of the ELD;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Notes that the number of cases falling in the scope of ELD varies considerably between the Member States;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. In the context of a review of the ELD, calls on the Commission to also impose liability for damage caused to human health and the environment; considers that doing so would bring the ELD into line with other EU legislation based on the protection of human health and the environment;deleted

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

Amendment 32 #

Nikos ANDROULAKIS, Seb DANCE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. In the context of a review of the ELD, calls on the Commission to also impose liability for damage ~~caused~~ to human health and the environment~~; considers that doing so would br~~, e.g. air and wetlands; considers that this would streamlinge the ELD ~~into line~~ with other EU legislation based on ~~the protection of human health and the environmen~~protecting human health and the environment and would facilitate adding provisions in the ELD, such as the requirement to carry out preventive measures and emergency remedial action either in the Directive or in national law implementing it;

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. In the context of a review of the ELD, calls on the Commission to extend the scope of the Directive and to also impose liability for damage caused to human health and the environment; considers that doing so would bring the ELD into line with other EU legislation based on the protection of human health and the environment;

Amendment 34 #

Mireille D'ORNANO, Jean-François JALKH, Sylvie GODDYN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. In the context of a review of the ELD, calls on the Commission to ~~also impose~~encourage the emergence of liability for damage caused to human health and the environment; considers that doing so would bring the ELD into line with other EU legislation based on the protection of human health and the environment;

Amendment 35 #

Nikos ANDROULAKIS, Seb DANCE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Calls on the Commission to include in the next review of the ELD damage to human health and the environment caused by air pollution emitted by cars violating the EU car emissions legislation, as this could increase the level of prevention and precaution;

Amendment 36 #

Mireille D'ORNANO, Jean-François JALKH, Sylvie GODDYN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. CRecalls ~~furthermore for the removal of the options for granting~~the findings of the Commission staff working document on the REFIT Evaluation of the Environmental Liability Directive (SWD/2016/0121 final), which underline that strict liability for hazardous activities is economically more efficient than fault liability; notes, however, that permit defence and state-of-the -art defences ~~in order~~ can provide important investor c~~reate a level playing field and promote the polluter pays principle~~ertainty for planning, research and development (R&D), and financial security for potential liabilities under the ELD; recommends that a further limitation of options for granting permit defence and state-of-the art defences be given due consideration in a future review of the ELD;

Amendment 37 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls furthermore for ~~the removal~~strict regulation of the options for granting permit defence and state-of-the art defences in order to create a level playing field and promote the polluter pays principle;

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls furthermore for the removal of the options for granting permit defence and state-of-the art defences in order to create a level playing field and promote the polluter pays principle as well as improve the effectiveness of the legislation;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls ~~furthermore for the removal of the options for granting permit defence and state-of-the art defences in order to~~on the Member States, using a robust legal framework to promote the polluter pays principle, to enforce the ELD by createing a level playing field ~~and promote the polluter pays principle~~;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)

-1 a. Welcomes the development of the Multi-Annual ELD Work Programme (MAWP) for the period 2017 - 2020;

Amendment 40 #

Mireille D'ORNANO, Jean-François JALKH, Sylvie GODDYN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Recommends that the option of requiring subsidiary state liability ~~is made mandatory in order to ensur~~be given due consideration in a future review of the ELD in order to assess its capacity to provide effective and proactive implementation of the legislation;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Recommends that the option of requiring subsidiary state liability is made mandatory in order to ensure effective and proactive implementation of the legislation; considers that when an operator who has caused damage cannot meet the claims for compensation, it should be permissible to fall back on the State, but that this must not, under any circumstances, burden taxpayers with extra taxes or charges;

Amendment 42 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Is of the view that considering the relevance and potential impacts of industry related disasters, the risks posed to human health, natural environment and property, further safeguards need to be added to grant European citizens a safe and sound disaster prevention and management system based on risk- sharing, the stepped-up responsibility of industrial operators and the polluter pays principle;

Amendment 43 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. In the context of a review of the ELD, calls on the Commission to consider whether it might impose an obligation on Member States to submit reports every two years on the application of the directive;

Amendment 44 #

Nikos ANDROULAKIS, Nicola CAPUTO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. In the context of a review of the ELD, restates its preference for mandatory financial security for operators; calls on the Commission to assess differentiated maximum liability thresholds for activities and to come forward with proposals to supplement this with an EU-wide fund designed to address remediation costs beyond the mandatory financial security;

Amendment 45 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. In the context of a review of the ELD, restates its preference for mandatory financial security for operators; calls on the Commission to ~~assess differentiated maximum liability thresholds for activities~~develop a harmonized EU methodology on calculating the maximum liability thresholds, depending on the characteristics of each activity and its surrounding area, and to come forward with proposals to supplement this with an EU-wide fund designed to address remediation costs beyond the mandatory financial security;

Amendment 46 #

Nicola CAPUTO, Nikos ANDROULAKIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. In the context of a review ~~of the ELD,~~ restates its preference for mandatory financial security, e.g. a mandatory environmental liability insurance for operators; calls on the Commission to assess differentiated maximum liability thresholds for activities and to come forward with proposals to supplement this with an EU-wide fund designed to address remediation costs beyond the mandatory financial security;

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

Amendment 48 #

Mireille D'ORNANO, Jean-François JALKH, Sylvie GODDYN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. In the context of a review of the ELD, restates its preference for mandatory financial security for operators; calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of working towards differentiated maximum liability thresholds for activities and to come forward with proposals to supplement this ~~with an EU-wide~~by promoting an international fund designed to address remediation costs beyond the mandatory financial security;

Amendment 49 #

Mireille D'ORNANO, Jean-François JALKH, Sylvie GODDYN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. In the context of a review of the ELD, restates its preference for mandatory financial security for operators; calls on the Commission to assess differentiated maximum liability thresholds for activities ~~and to come forward with proposals to supplement this with an EU-wide fund designed to address remediation costs beyond the mandatory financial security~~;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Calls for the Environmental Liability Directive (ELD) to be revised as soon as possible; maintains that the remediation of environmental damage will very likely be one of the main issues for liability law in the 21st century;

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. In the context of a review of the ELD, restates its preference for mandatory financial security for operators; calls on the Commission to assess differentiated maximum liability thresholds for activities ~~and to come forward with proposals to supplement this with an EU-wide fund designed to address remediation costs beyond the mandatory financial security~~in order to address remediation costs;

Amendment 51 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. In the context of a review of the ELD, restates its preference for mandatory financial security for operators; calls on the Commission to assess differentiated maximum liability thresholds for activities and to come forward with proposals to supplement this with an EU-wide fund or an insurance-based risk sharing facility designed to address remediation costs beyond the mandatory financial security;

Amendment 52 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Draws attention to the European Commission feasibility study on the concept of an EU-wide industrial disaster risk sharing facility1a and emphasizes the necessity of performing further analysis and a deeper feasibility study on the key legal and financial issues; _________________ 1a Study to explore the feasibility of creating a fund to cover environmental liability and losses occurring from industrial accidents, Final Report, European Commission, DG ENV, 17 April 2013.

Amendment 53 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Calls on the Commission to establish a compulsory environmental liability insurance policy to cover all operators in the EU, and to obligate each Member State to take all measures necessary to ensure environmental liability of all operators in its territory;

Amendment 54 #

Mireille D'ORNANO, Jean-François JALKH, Sylvie GODDYN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7 b. Encourages Member States to take measures to accelerate the development of financial security instruments and markets by the appropriate economic and financial operators, including financial mechanisms in case of insolvency, with the aim of enabling operators to use financial guarantees to cover their responsibilities;

Amendment 55 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that the ELD adequately supports efforts to attain the objectives of the EU Birds and Habitats Directives; insists that the authorities responsible for environmental inspections are involved in the implementation and enforcement of environmental liability law; believes that the Commission should also take into account the administrative burden entailed for Member States, even though the environment is an area in which they share competence with the EU.

Amendment 56 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Considers criminal sanctions another important deterrent against environmental damage and notes with regret that the Directive 2008/99/EC on the protection of the environment through criminal law is not up to date; calls for the Commission to review its scope to cover all applicable Union environmental legislation without further delay;

Amendment 57 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8 b. Stresses the urgency of establishing European legislation on minimum standards for implementing the Aarhus Convention access to justice pillar;

Amendment 58 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)

8 c. Reinstates its call on the Commission to come forward with a proposal for environmental inspections at the European level without further delay.

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Notes that whereas civil law is one of the oldest branches of law, the ELD represents a new legislative concept and, that being the case, only its implementation can serve to reveal the extent of its implications, this being necessary in order to assess the ELD in terms of its appropriateness and proportionality;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Welcomes the Commission's efforts to assess and bridge gaps in the implementation of the ELD across Member States;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. In the context of a review of the ELD, calls for greater clarity of the definition of environmental damage, specifically with regard to the criteria to determine significant adverse effects on protected species and habitats in Annex I, and with regard to significant risk for damage to land and water in Article 2(1) of the ELD;

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Recalls the experiences in the implementation of the current financial securities which have demonstrated challenges in ensuring the liability of operators for environmental damage and is concerned about the examples where operators have not been in a position to bear the costs of environmental remediation;

source: 604.509

2017/06/23 JURI 73 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the EU seeks to ensure its citizens have a high level of health protection and improvement of environmental quality, as well as promoting the prudent and rational utilisation of natural resources, accompanied by measures at international level to address global or regional environmental problems;

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas new scientific findings show that pollution from industrial activities can affect the environment as well as human ~~body~~ in hitherto unsuspected ways and that this endangers human health, sustainability, biological and bio- evolutionary balances;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas many Member States have made progress towards effectively achieving the main objectives of preventing and remedying environmental damage, however, in a few Member States the enforcement of the ELD remains insufficient;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Acknowledges the importance of the Commission’s studies and reports onregarding the assessment of the implementation of the ELD and its effects on the Member States;

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Observes with concern that the findings of those reports give an alarming picture of the actual implementation of the ELD and notes that the directive has been transposed in a patchy and uninterested way in many Member States;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Welcomes the Commission’s recommendations set out in its report to the Council and European Parliament under Article 18(2) of Directive 2004/35/EC on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage, in particular the priority given by it to promoting the harmonisation of national solutions and practices within the framework of the Directive and establishing how it can be implemented effectively and coherently in a wider legal liability framework;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Considers that~~, according to the Commission report, the transposition of the ELD~~ the transposition of the ELD into national liability systems has not resulted in a level playing field and that as confirmed in the Commission report, it is currently totally disparate in both legal and practical terms and that further measures are required to enable regulatory standardisation to take place across the EU;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Considers that, according to the Commission report, the transposition of the ELD is currently totally disparate in both legal and practical terms and that ~~further measure~~additional efforts are required to enable regulatory standardisation to take place across the EU;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses that the ability of the ELD in achieving a high level of environmental protection and in preventing and remedying environmental damage in the EU is hampered by significant lack of clarity and uniform application of key concepts, and underdeveloped capacities and expertise;

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Points out~~Regrets that, in spite of the action taken by the Commission concerning late transposition and issues relating to non- conformity and that, in spite of the ELD’s extreme flexibility, seven Member States have yet to resolve a number of non- compliance issues;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Notes the abnormal inconsistency in the reporting by Member States of cases of environmental damage ~~by the Member States, which is probably due to the habit of applying national legislation instead of the ELD;~~that triggered the application of the ELD1a, something that can be attributed to implementation of their national legislation instead of the ELD; __________________ 1aAccording to the Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament under Article 18(2) of Directive 2004/35/EC on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage, between April 2007 and April 2013, Member States reported around 1 245 confirmed cases of environmental damage which triggered the application of the ELD. Moreover, according to the same report, the number of cases varies considerably from one Member State to another. Two Member States account for over 86 % of all reported cases (Hungary: 563, Poland: 506 cases), most of the remaining cases having been reported by six Member States (60 by Germany, 40 by Greece, 17 by Italy and 8 by Latvia, Spain and the United Kingdom). 11 Member States reported no such incidents in 2007, possibly because they deal with them exclusively under their national system.

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas Article 11 TFEU stipulates that environmental protection requirements must be integrated into the definition and implementation of the Union’s policies and activities, in particular with a view to promoting sustainable development;

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Points out that the different interpretations and application of the ‘significance threshold’ for environmental damage are one of the main barriers to an effective and uniform application of the ELD, while precise data on administrative costs for public authorities, including data on the application of complementary and compensatory remediation, are limited, quite divergent, and for business not available at all;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Deplores the fact that under ELD, incidents are defined as “serious” only if they give rise to deaths or serious injuries, with no reference to the consequences for the environment; highlights therefore that even if it does not give rise to deaths or serious injuries, an incident may have a serious impact on the environment, by virtue of its scale or because it affects, for example, protected areas, protected species or particularly vulnerable habitats;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Notes that the cost of environmental damage for the operators responsible can be reduced through the use of financial security instruments~~, but also that~~ (covering insurance and alternative instruments, such as bank guarantees, bonds or funds); notes that, despite this, demand is low due to the insufficient number of cases detected in many Member States, in addition to the lack of clarity regarding certain concepts set out in the directive and the slower emergence of a number of insurance markets;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Notes that the cost of environmental damage for the operators responsible can be reduced through the use of financial security instruments~~, but also that demand is low due to the insufficient number of cases detected in many Member Sta~~ (insurance and alternative instruments such as bank guarantees, ~~in addition to the lack of clarity regarding certain concepts set out in the directive~~funds, or securities);

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Notes that the cost of environmental damage for the operators responsible can be reduced through the use of financial security instruments, but also that demand ~~is low due to the insufficient number of cases detected in many~~may vary significantly according to the level of maturity of the market for such instruments among Member States, in addition to the lack of clarity regarding certain concepts set out in the directive;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Believes that within the ELD financial security market, demand is still low due to the insufficient number of cases detected in many Member States, the lack of clarity regarding certain concepts set out in the directive, and the fact that, in many Member States, insurance models are generally proving slow to emerge;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Stresses that problems persist regarding the application of the directive to large-scale accidents ~~and the insolvency of economic operators responsible for damage~~, especially when it is not possible to identify the liable polluter and/or the polluter becomes insolvent or bankrupt;

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Welcomes the fact that, as regards the application of the ELD in relation to protected species and natural habitats, half the Member States apply a broader scope (Belgium, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom);

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Reiterates that there is a lack of data available on ELD cases and comparable incidents treated under national legislation; notes that the ELD provides an obligation for notifying the competent authority of imminent threat of, or actual environmental damage; regrets however that there is no obligation to publish such notifications or information about how the cases were dealt with; Notes that some Member States have identified this limitation in their national legislation and thus set up databases about the notifications/incidents/cases. However, the practice varies broadly from Member State to Member State and is rather limited;

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Emphasises that compensatory regimes must be able to address transboundary claims effectively, rapidly, within a reasonable timeframe and without discrimination between claimants from different European Economic Area countries; recommends that they should cover both primary and secondary damage caused in all the affected areas, given that such incidents affect wider areas and may have a long-term impact; stresses the need especially for neighbouring countries, which are not members of the European Economic Area, to respect international law regarding the environmental protection and liability;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas a coordinated environmental strategy across the Union is a way of encouraging cooperation and ensuring that EU policies are consistent with each other;

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)

15b. Points out that there is still lack of awareness and information about the ELD, insufficient resources and expertise to implement the Directive and uncertainties concerning definitions such as ‘significant’ threshold and under-use of complementary and compensatory remediation. Calls on the Commission to support Member States in the development of tools to support a better implementation of the ELD regime, such as guidance documents for operators, competent authorities, civil society organisations and insurers;

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)

15c. Reiterates that according to the ELD, persons adversely affected by environmental damage should be entitled to ask the competent authorities to take action; believes in this regard that a compensatory collective redress mechanism should be available to any individual or organisation that has suffered due to environmental damage or impairment of right within the scope of the ELD.

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 d (new)

15d. Taking into account that the European law stipulates that European citizens should be guaranteed effective and timely access to justice (Article 9(3) of the Aarhus Regulation, Article 6 TEU and relevant provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights) and that the costs of the environmental harm should be borne by the polluter (Article 191 TFEU), calls on the Commission to come up with a legislative proposal on compensatory collective redress mechanisms in the Member States based on breaches of provisions of Union environmental law;

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Calls for the ELD to be reviewed as soon as possible and the definition of ‘environmental damage’ laid down in Article 2 of the directive to be revised and to broaden the definition in order to extend the scope of application to damages caused to human health and the environment caused by air pollution generated by the car industry; reminds that if car manufacturers would be held financial liable for remedying the environmental damage they cause, it would increase the level of prevention and precaution;

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Calls for the ELD to be reviewed as soon as possible and the definition of ‘environmental damage’ laid down in Article 2 of the directive to be revised with a view to making it sufficiently effective, consistent and coherent to keep pace with the rapid evolution of pollutants from industrial activities;

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. In the context of a review reinstates its preference for mandatory financial security, e.g. a mandatory environmental liability insurance for operators;

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Calls for the Commission to clarify and specify the concept of ‘significance threshold’, in order to standardise the application of the ELD, making it uniform in all Member States; and in particular to assess differentiated maximum liability thresholds for activities;

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Calls for the Commission to clarify ~~and specify~~, define and set out in detail the concept of ‘significance threshold’, in order to standardise the application of the ELD, making it uniform in all Member States;

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Calls on the Commission to provide a clear and coherent interpretation of the geographical scope of ELD ‘favourable conservation status’ (EU territory, national territory, natural landscape area); in this respect, a site- specific approach is necessary to ensure correct and effective implementation;

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Calls on the Commission to determine what rules are necessary in order to establish a clear and irrefutable distinction between those cases in which the ELD is applicable and those in which the national standard should apply, where this is more stringent;

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas Article 191(1) TFEU states that Union policy on the environment shall contribute to pursuit of objectives, such as protecting and improving the quality of the environment, protecting human health, ensuring prudent and rational utilisation of natural resources, promoting measures at international level to deal with regional or worldwide environmental problems;

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls on the Commission to check whether it is possible to extend the scope of the ELD also to damage to the air15, which can have significant health risks, and to damage caused by electromagnetic pollution16; __________________ 15Thisoption was considered in the Commission document of 19 February 2014 ‘Study on ELD Effectiveness: Scope and Exceptions’ p. 84. 16The effects of continuous exposure to electromagnetic fields were considered in a study by STOA, ‘The Physiological and Environmental Effects of Non-Ionising Electromagnetic Radiation - 03-2001’; furthermore, there are still no data available on the effects of long-term exposure to intense electromagnetic fields.deleted

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls on the Commission to check whether it is possible to extend the scope of the ELD also to damage to the air15, which can have significant health risks, and to damage caused by electromagnetic pollution16; __________________ 15This option was considered in the Commission document of 19 February 2014 ‘Study on ELD Effectiveness: Scope and Exceptions’ p. 84. 16The effects of continuous exposure to electromagnetic fields were considered in a study by STOA, ‘The Physiological and Environmental Effects of Non-Ionising Electromagnetic Radiation - 03-2001’; furthermore, there are still no data available on the effects of long-term exposure to intense electromagnetic fields.deleted

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. ~~Calls on the Commission to check whether it is possible~~Reiterates that air pollution harms human health and the environment and according to Eurostat, Nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter pollution pose serious health risks while Europe’s sensitive ecosystem areas are affected by acid deposition of excess sulphur and nitrogen compounds (SOx, NOx, NH3); Calls on the Commission to extend the scope of the ELD also to damage to the air15, which can have significant health risks, and to damage caused by electromagnetic pollution16; __________________ 15 This option was considered in the Commission document of 19 February 2014 ‘Study on ELD Effectiveness: Scope and Exceptions’ p. 84. 16 The effects of continuous exposure to electromagnetic fields were considered in a study by STOA, ‘The Physiological and Environmental Effects of Non-Ionising Electromagnetic Radiation - 03-2001’; furthermore, there are still no data available on the effects of long-term exposure to intense electromagnetic fields.

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls on the Commission to check whether it is possible to extend the scope of the ELD and impose liability for damage to human health and the environment, including also to damage to the air15, which can have significant health risks, and to check whether it is possible as regards damage caused by electromagnetic pollution16; __________________ 15 This option was considered in the Commission document of 19 February 2014 ‘Study on ELD Effectiveness: Scope and Exceptions’ p. 84. 16 The effects of continuous exposure to electromagnetic fields were considered in a study by STOA, ‘The Physiological and Environmental Effects of Non-Ionising Electromagnetic Radiation - 03-2001’; furthermore, there are still no data available on the effects of long-term exposure to intense electromagnetic fields.

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Reiterates that article 4.5 of the ELD stipulates that Directive shall only apply to environmental damage or to an imminent threat of such damage caused by pollution of a diffuse character, where it is possible to establish a causal link between the damage and the activities of individual operators; Reiterates that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) already in its 2013 Report established a rigorous causal relationship between gas emissions and damage related to climate change and the environment.1b __________________ 1bIPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F. et al. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1535 pp, doi:10.1017/CBO9781107415324.

Amendment 45 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)

18b. Takes seriously the research published by Environmental Research Letters, which estimates that 1,200 people in Europe will die early, each losing as much as a decade of their life, as a result of excess emissions generated between 2008 and 2015 by affected cars sold in Germany1a; Calls on the Commission, to include, in the next review of the ELD, damage to human health and the environment caused by air pollution emitted by cars violating the EU car emissions legislation; __________________ 1aChossière, Guillaume P et al. Public health impacts of excess NOx emissions from Volkswagen diesel passenger vehicles in Germany. 3 March 2017. Environmental Research Letters, Volume 12, Number 3

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls for the establishment of a European fund for the protection of the environment from damage caused by industrial activity governed by the ELD17, for insolvency risks and only in cases where financial security markets fail; __________________ 17As regards this option please refer to the document published by the Commission on 17 April 2013 entitled ‘Study to explore the feasibility of creating a fund to cover environmental liability and losses occurring from industrial accidents’.deleted

Amendment 47 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls for the establishment of a European fund for the protection of the environment from damage caused by industrial activity governed by the ELD17 , for insolvency risks and only in cases where financial security markets fail; __________________ 17 As regards this option please refer to the document published by the Commission on 17 April 2013 entitled ‘Study to explore the feasibility of creating a fund to cover environmental liability and losses occurring from industrial accidents’.deleted

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls for the establishment of a European fund for the protection of the environment from damage caused by industrial activity governed by the ELD17 , for insolvency risks and only in cases where financial security markets fail; the same should apply in cases of large scale accidents, when it is impossible to trace the operator responsible for the damage; __________________ 17 As regards this option please refer to the document published by the Commission on 17 April 2013 entitled ‘Study to explore the feasibility of creating a fund to cover environmental liability and losses occurring from industrial accidents’.

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls ~~for the~~on the Commission to consider the possibility of establish~~ment of~~ing a European fund for the protection of the environment from damage caused by industrial activity governed by the ELD17, for insolvency risks and only in cases where financial security markets fail; __________________ 17 As regards this option please refer to the document published by the Commission on 17 April 2013 entitled ‘Study to explore the feasibility of creating a fund to cover environmental liability and losses occurring from industrial accidents’.

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas Article 191(2) TFEU stipulates that Union policy on the environment shall aim at a high level of protection and ishall be based on the ~~‘polluter pays’ principle~~precautionary principle and on the principles that preventive action should be taken, that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source and that the polluter should pay;

Amendment 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Calls on the Commission to encourage the Member States to develop financial collateral instruments for compensating traditional damage claims for environmental incidents, including in cases of insolvency;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls for consideration to be given to the option of including in the ELD a third-party liability regime for damage caused to human health and the environment18; __________________ 18As already provided for in Portugal and as assessed in the Commission study of 16 May 2013 entitled ‘Implementation challenges and obstacles of the Environmental Liability Directive (ELD)’ p. 75.deleted

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls for ~~consideration to be given to the option of~~an assessment of whether it is necessary to includ~~ing~~e in the ELD a third-party liability regime for damage caused to human health and the environment18; __________________ 18 As already provided for in Portugal and as assessed in the Commission study of 16 May 2013 entitled ‘Implementation challenges and obstacles of the Environmental Liability Directive (ELD)’ p. 75.

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for the adoption of a regime for the secondary liability of successors of liable parties and for the option of requiring subsidiary state liability to be made mandatory in order to ensure effective and proactive implementation of the legislation;

Amendment 54 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Calls furthermore for the removal of the options for granting permit defence and state-of-the art defences in order to create a level playing field and promote the polluter pays principle as well as improve the effectiveness of the legislation;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)

21b. Stresses the urgency of establishing European legislation on minimum standards for implementing the Aarhus Convention’s access to justice pillar;

Amendment 56 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 c (new)

21c. Calls on the Commission to come forward with a proposal for environmental inspections at the European level without further delay;

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Calls on the Commission to establish a mandatory register for operators who engage in the dangerous activities listed in Annex III ~~and a financial monitoring scheme to ensure the operators are solvent~~;

Amendment 58 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Calls on the Commission to establish a ~~mandatory~~ register for operators who engage in the dangerous activities listed in Annex III and a financial monitoring scheme to ensure the operators are solvent;

Amendment 59 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Calls on the Commission to establish a mandatory register for operators who engage in the dangerous activities ~~listed in Annex III~~ and a financial monitoring scheme to ensure the operators are solvent;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas Article 191(2) TFEU stipulates that Union policy on the environment shall aim at a high level of protection and is based on the ‘polluter pays’ principle, together with the precautionary principle, the principle that preventive action should be taken and the principle that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source;

Amendment 60 #

Gilles LEBRETON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Calls for the establishment of a European register of cases of environmental damage governed by the ELD; For the purpose of not causing unnecessary administrative burdens on public authorities and operators and keeping in line with the purpose and provisions as set forth by this Directive, a structured dialogue is required; A register should also be consistent with the latest mandatory disclosures for environmental risks imposed by the Non- Financial Reporting Directive 2014/95/EU adopted in 2014 and applicable from January 2018 for the financial year 2017;

Amendment 62 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Calls for the establishment of a European register of cases of environmental damage governed by the ELD; Calls on the Commission and all the Member States to develop public available databases for reporting on ELD cases in order to create better trust in the ELD system and better implementation; Publication of public databases would enable stakeholders, operators and the public to become more aware of the existence of the ELD regime and its enforcement and thus contribute to better prevention and remediation of environmental damages;

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Calls for the establishment of a European register of cases of environmental damage governed by the ELD modelled on, for example, the Irish reporting system whereby cases of environmental damage can be notified online;

Amendment 64 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. In order to be effectively accessible, public databases of ELD cases could be established according to the following criteria: – they should be available online. Furthermore information should be granted also upon request; – the database should be central for every country, not separate register for every region; – notifications about new incidents should be immediately published online; – the database should include information about the name of polluter, nature and extent of the caused damage, prevention/remediation action measures taken, proceedings carried out by/and or with authorities;

Amendment 65 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. ~~Calls for the extension of the categories of dangerous activities set out in Annex III in order to include all activities that are potentially harmful to the environment and human health~~In the context of a review of the ELD, considers it a priority to extend strict liability to non-Annex III activities for all environmental damage to improve the effectiveness of the legislation; recommends to the Commission, in the interest of clarity of the law, to delete Annex III;

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Calls ~~for~~on the ~~extension of~~Commission to examine the possibility of extending the categories of dangerous activities set out in Annex III in order to include all activities that are potentially harmful to the environment and human health;

Amendment 67 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Stresses the importance of a culture of environmental damage prevention, through a systematic information campaign in which Member States should ensure that potential polluters and potential victims are informed of the risks to which they are exposed, of the availability of insurance or other financial and legal means that could protect them from those risks and of the benefits they could gain from them;

Amendment 68 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Considers that all cases of proven liability, as well as the details of penalties applied, should be made public in order to make the true cost of environmental damage transparent to all;

Amendment 69 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Proposes that a channel be set up to encourage environmentalist NGOs and other stakeholder bodies to put forward their comments and criticisms;

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas in order to cover liability for environmental damage, a financial security market has grown up spontaneously, but whereas this might, however, be insufficient to cover specific cases, for instance for SMEs or involving particular types of operations (offshore platforms, nuclear facilities, etc.);

Amendment 70 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. ~~Suggests that tax rel~~Calls on the Commission to introduce subsidiefs or other ~~favourable arrangements be introduced for companies which~~instruments for operators who pursue an occupational activity, as defined in Article 2(6) of the ELD, and who successfully ~~endeavour~~try to prevent environmental damage;

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Recommends the establishment of specific independent authorities to be vested with the powers of management and control, including powers to impose penalties, laid down in the ELD, including the possibility of requiring financial guarantees of potentially liable parties, taking into account the specific situation of the individual potential polluter, for example with regard to environmental permits;deleted

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Calls on the Commission to step up its training programme for the application of the ELD ~~for~~in the Member States and to set up helpdesks for practitioners providing information, assistance and assessment support for risk and damage evaluations;

Amendment 73 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Calls on the Commission to step up its training programme for the application of the ELD for the Member States and recommends that guidance documents be adopted to help Member States transpose the legislation correctly;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. whereas the uneven implementation of the ELD is due primarily to, for example, difficulties of appreciation when the damage to a natural resource exceeds the set threshold and the fact that many Member States have no means of eliciting comments and criticism from environmentalist NGOs and other stakeholder bodies;

Amendment 9 #