The government is awaiting feedback from the European Commission on how to quantify and monetarise environmental damage caused by polluters before going ahead with the transposition of a key EU environmental directive.
The so-called environmental liability directive was to have been transposed into national law by all EU member States by 30 March; only Italy, Latvia and Lithuania had done so by the deadline. The European Parliament and the Council adopted the directive on 21 April 2004 and should member States still to transpose the directive fail to do so “very soon”, the EC will take legal action.
The important directive, under discussion since the 1980s, lays down liability rules for damage to the environment and is based on the “polluter pays” principle enshrined in the EC treaty. The directive aims to ensure that environmental damage is prevented or remedied, and that those found responsible for such damage are held accountable.
Interestingly, in Malta, it is the public authorities themselves that may end up suffering the consequences once the directive is transposed into national law.
According to the directive, parties potentially liable for the costs of preventing or rectifying environmental damage are the operators of dangerous activities.
Such activities, as listed in the directive, include those that have released heavy metals into water or into the air, such as landfill operations at the “old” Maghtab, landfill sites themselves, incineration plants like those at St Luke’s Hospital and the civil abattoir, and installations that produce dangerous chemicals, such as asbestos removal from ships at the Drydocks and at Enemalta facilities.
Speaking to The Malta Independent on Sunday, an environment and rural affairs spokesperson said the ministry had commissioned a regulatory impact assessment on the directive’s transposition. The assessment included an “extensive consultation exercise with all affected players in order to identify potential impacts”.
Following the assessment, the Malta Environment and Planning Authority had prepared an implementation strategy, which is currently being reviewed.
The spokesperson added, “Malta will opt for an implementation that is as simple as possible and which concentrates on achieving the essential environmental objectives of the directive without drastically increasing administrative costs and negatively impacting on competitiveness.
“The Commission has still not prepared guidance on issues such as how environmental damage is to be quantified and monetarised. This guidance should help in the transposition of the directive in Malta.”
Environmental damage, as defined by the directive, includes damage to water resources, natural habitats, animals and plants as well as contamination of land that causes significant harm to human health.
Through the directive, public interest groups, such as non-governmental organisations, will be allowed to require public authorities to act and, if
necessary, to challenge their decisions before the courts if those decisions are considered illegal.
The directive, however, does not oblige operators to ensure coverage of their potential liabilities through appropriate financial security products such as insurance, but member States are required to encourage the development of such instruments that allow for financial security and their use by the operators.
Commenting on the directive this week, Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said, “The idea that the polluter must pay is a cornerstone of EU policy and with this legislation we are putting it into practise. The environmental liability directive will provide a strong incentive to prevent damage from happening at all, and enables governments to seek redress from the culprit when serious damage does occur.
“I am very concerned that only three member States have transposed this vital legislation so far. If the others do not follow suit very soon the Commission will have to consider starting legal action.”