Page 46 - Lawtext Environmental Law & Management Journal Sample

157
157
157
INDUSTRY SOUNDINGS – POCKLINGTON : (2008) 20 ELM 157
157
Industry Soundings

David Pocklington British Cement Association 1

Legislation by committee
of an article in a given directive, and may only be prepared
It could be argued that many of the European Court’s to table an amendment if supported by other MEPs.
deliberations on the meaning of ‘waste’ would not have Likewise, MEPs may also table amendments that they have
been required had the initial 1975 Directive or its 1991 no intention of pursuing but plan to concede as part of a
revision been drafted more rigorously and with a better future bargaining strategy.
appreciation of the practical implications. These lessons From the lobbyist’s point of view, it is important to be
do not appear to have been learned, and parts of the aware of these nuances in the selection of their key
current modification of the Waste Framework Directive amendments, the wording, and the MEP or group of MEPs
(WFD) appear to be suffering from the joint attentions of to approach whom they believe will stand the best chance
extensive lobbying and political compromise. of gaining support.
On 8 April 2008, the ENVI Committee of the The table below indicates the amendments made in
European Parliament voted on the 250 or so amendments relation to a single aspect of the WFD, the second
that had been submitted on the WFD. An analysis of the paragraph of the waste hierarchy.
voting list for these amendments reveals the complexity It is clear that voting alone cannot resolve such
of the situation that had to be resolved by the rapporteur: complex, interdependent issues, and the rapporteur must
most MEPs from the ENVI Committee submitted a number develop a compromise text that encompasses the agreed
of amendments, depending upon their personal, political positions. It is perhaps not surprising that while the agreed
or other views, which may have been influenced by one or wording might satisfy MEPs, it does not necessarily make
more of the many groups with an interest in the outcome. good law.

abled byy
abled by
abled b
Analysis
Amendment
Amendment
Amendment
Amendment T T T T Tabled babled byy Anal
Amendment
Analyysissis
Analyysissis
Anal
umber
n n n n numberumber
umber
umber
103, 3rd part Rapporteur/Drcar
Murko/ Blokland
65, 3rd part Evans/Lucas Compatible with 103, 3rd part as a change of the word ‘thinking’
into ‘assessment’ + changes to supra 2 of para 2
155, 2nd part de Brùn/Musacchio Partly compatible with 103, 3rd part and 65, 3rd part (reference
/Sacconi to Consultation Forum will be taken out if none of ams 222, 223 or 224
is adopted)
22 Rapporteur Falls if 103, 3rd part, 65, 3rd part or 155 2nd part is adopted
157 Freitas Compatible, in whole or in part, with 103, 65, 155 and 22
158 Hegyi Falls if 157 is adopted. Compatible with 103, 65, 155 and 22
Many of the proposed articles in the new directive An example is the consolidation of amendments 69
were subject to several amendments. Although in some and 70 which related to whether material excavated in the
cases these were complimentary, in others there was course of construction should be regarded as ‘waste’ or
duplication, some of the tabled amendments contradicted not, ie the attempt to resolve the problematic issue raised
2
other provisions, and others were inadmissible. by the Van de Walle case, which held that an unintentional
The tabling of amendments is an art in itself. MEPs spillage from petrol storage tanks was ‘waste’ and any soil
can be quite specific, addressing only a single component contaminated by the spillage was also ‘waste’ even before
it was excavated.

1 The views expressed in this article are those of the author, and do not
necessarily reflect those of the British Cement Association, or its
member companies. 2 Ministère Public v Paul Van de Walle Case C–1/03.

ENVIRONMENTAL LAW & MANAGEMENT PUBLISHED BY LAWTEXT PUBLISHING LIMITED
www.lawtext.com