Europaudvalget 2017-18
KOM (2017) 0753 Bilag 4
Offentligt
1875440_0001.png
An Comhchoiste um Thithíocht, Pleanáil agus Rialtas
Áitiúil
COM (2017) 753
Togra le haghaidh Treoir ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus ón gComhairle
maidir le cáilíocht an uisce a bheartaítear lena ól ag an duine
(athmhúnlú)
Márta 2018
Joint Committee on Housing, Planning and Local
Government
COM (2017) 753
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council
on the quality of water intended for human consumption (recast)
March 2018
32/HPLG/09
kom (2017) 0753 - Bilag 4: Andre parlamenters udtalelser om Kommissionens forslag til drikkevandsdirektivet
J
OINT
C
OMMITTEE ON
H
OUSING
, P
LANNING AND
L
OCAL
G
OVERNMENT
Report under Dáil Standing Order 114 and Seanad Standing Order 116 on
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the quality of
water intended for human consumption (recast)
1.
Introduction
1.1 The principle of subsidiarity is defined in Article 5(3) of the Treaty on European Union
(TEU) as follows:
Under the principle of subsidiarity, in areas which do not fall within its exclusive
competence, the Union shall act only if and insofar as the objectives of the proposed
action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, either at central level or
at regional and local level, but can rather, by reason of the scale or effects of the
proposed action, be better achieved at Union level.
Article 5(3) also gives specific responsibility to national Parliaments to ensure that EU
institutions apply the principle in accordance with Protocol 2 on the application of the
principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.
1.2 The test established by Article 5(3) TEU is, in effect, a “comparative efficiency” exercise,
involving a
necessity
test and a
greater benefits
test:
(i)
Necessity
- Is action by the European Union necessary to achieve the
objective of the proposal? Can the objective of the proposal only be
achieved, or achieved to a sufficient extent, by EU action?
Greater Benefits
- Would the objective be better achieved at EU level – i.e.
would EU action provide greater benefits than action at Member States
level?
(ii)
1.3 To assist national Parliaments in their evaluation of subsidiarity compliance, Article 5 of
Protocol 2 provides explicitly that
Any draft legislative act should contain a detailed statement making it possible to
appraise compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. This
statement should contain some assessment of the proposal's financial impact and, in
the case of a directive, of its implications for the rules to be put in place by Member
States…
1.4 Therefore, any new draft legislative act
must be supported by a sufficiently ‘detailed statement’ to allow a judgment to
be made by national Parliaments on its compliance with the principle of
subsidiarity
kom (2017) 0753 - Bilag 4: Andre parlamenters udtalelser om Kommissionens forslag til drikkevandsdirektivet
must clearly satisfy both the
necessity
and
greater benefit
tests
must, under the principle of conferral set down in Article 5(2) of the TEU, show
that the Union is acting ‘only
within the limits of the competences conferred
upon it by the Member States in the Treaties to attain the objectives set out
therein’.
2.
Scrutiny by the Committee
The Joint Committee on Housing, Planning and Local Government (“the Committee”)
scrutinised this proposal at its meetings of 8 March 2018 and 21 March 2018, concluding
with a decision to issue a Reasoned Opinion.
3.
Background to the Proposal
On 1 February 2018, the European Commission published a proposal for a recast of a
current Directive, the ultimate purpose of which is to ensure the provision of high-quality
drinking water in light of the latest scientific advice, and to help customers access this water
and to find reliable information about its supply.
The proposal is a response to the successful European Citizens’ Initiative, Right2Water,
which received the support of 1.6 million Europeans. The initiative was submitted to the
Commission in December 2013, and urged in particular that ‘EU
institutions and Member
States be obliged to ensure that all inhabitants enjoy the right to water and sanitation’
and
that ‘the
EU increase its efforts to achieve universal access to water and sanitation’.
The revision is also part of the plan to transition to a circular economy and to help reduce
bottled water consumption.
4.
Opinion of the Committee
The Committee supports for the overarching goal of the proposal, in particular the aim of
improving standards of drinking water and improving the monitoring systems for the quality
of drinking water. However, the Committee has had specific regard to the Treaty provisions
and is of the opinion that the proposal does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity.
The reasons are set out in the following paragraphs.
The Committee believes that the proposal unnecessarily limits the provision for
national decision-making. Consequently, the scope for Member States to choose
how to implement the proposal’s objectives at national level, and in accordance with
established national systems, is constrained.
The Committee believes that the actions in this proposal do not sufficiently restrict
themselves to those necessary to fulfil its stated objectives and, therefore, are not
proportionate to the objectives of this proposal.
kom (2017) 0753 - Bilag 4: Andre parlamenters udtalelser om Kommissionens forslag til drikkevandsdirektivet
1875440_0004.png
The Committee does not see the necessity for diverging from the recommendations
of the World Health Organization in relation to the parameters for monitoring the
quality of water for human consumption.
The Committee is further of the opinion that this proposal does not adequately take
into account local and regional considerations and has the potential to have far
reaching implications on well-established national arrangements in place in Ireland.
The Committee is satisfied that the above points, taken together, clearly demonstrate that
the proposal does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity.
5.
Recommendation of the Committee
The Committee agreed this Report under Dáil Standing Order 114 and Seanad Standing
Order 116 on 27 March 2018.
The Committee, pursuant to Standing Orders recommends the Reasoned Opinion contained
in section 4 above, for agreement by Dáil Éireann and Seanad Éireann.
Maria Bailey, T.D.
Chair of the Joint Committee
27 March 2018