Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-06-15-Speech-2-567"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100615.31.2-567"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"It is true that under the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive, the responsibility for gathering the necessary environmental information and submitting it to the public authorities is given to the developer. However, this does not result in an opaque and partial EIA process as the directive contains several safeguards which ensure a transparent and objective environmental assessment of projects.
These safeguards are to be found, firstly, in the description of the minimum information to be included in the environmental impact assessment report which is required by the EIA Directive and, secondly, in the consultations with the competent environmental authorities and the public. Indeed, all the information provided by the developer has to be made public to the environmental authorities and the public, which have to be consulted.
The accuracy of this information can be challenged at any point of the consultations, before the final decision is taken. This means that the competent environmental authorities can use their own capacity to proceed with a proper assessment of the information provided, while NGOs or interested parties can – and very often do – challenge the whole assessment on the basis of the data provided, in case they do not reflect the real situation or omit clearly to conform to the requirements of the EIA provisions. The final decision to grant or refuse development consent must take into consideration the results of consultations and the information gathered and must contain the main reasons on which it is based. All this is also made available to the public.
But, to be honest, your question is very relevant. After more than 20 years of implementation, we have identified the areas where improvements are needed and reached the conclusion that the EIA Directive should be reviewed. My objective is to present a new text which will further improve environmental protection, take on board the challenges in the areas of climate change, energy and biodiversity, integrate the ECJ case-law and harmonise and simplify, to the extent possible, existing procedures.
In this context, the overall quality of the environmental assessments will be a central issue, and there is certainly room for improvement. On the one hand, the quality control of the EIA documentation submitted by the developer could be improved. On the other hand, the quality of the EIA process itself could be reinforced.
My services have already started working on the review of the EIA Directive. By the end of June, a broad consultation of the public and of the stakeholders will be launched. You are, of course, invited to participate and also express your views.
Once all the relevant data and information are on the table, the Commission will identify the appropriate policy options for amending the EIA Directive, including ways of ensuring the independence of the environmental assessments. Any Commission proposal will have to be subject to a legislative impact assessment. I am not yet in a position to give you a date for the Commission’s proposal, but my intention is clearly to present this proposal during my mandate, better sooner than later, though of course, there is still some quite serious work to be done before then."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples