The Environment Committee has debated 45 challenges to secondary legislation. 10 failed.
If the Environment Committee backs the challenge, most of the time the full Parliament backs the challenge, usually with clear majorities.
The challenges fall into the following categories: GMOs 19, Pesticides 14, Food 6, Chemicals 5, Other 2
Some Observations
Looking at the challenges that have got backing:
- Only ‘pro-environment challenges get past the Committee.
- The rhythm of the scrutiny is now familiar. The coalition of winners is well set. They are cross-party. The challenges are often are a proxy for broader issues (e.g. deforestation for GMOs) than the file suggests.
- There is a clear trend for targeted substance challenges for pesticides.
- Issues raised in the debates are clear. The debates for some challenges seem identical to previous challenges.
- The challenges are not a surprise. Anything linked to contributing to certain issues will be challenged.
- The Commission briefs MEPs. For some challenges, the Commission’s points have been raised by MEPs before the Commission gets around to speaking.
- An alleged divergence between the scientific advice of an EU Agency and the proposal is a trigger for a challenge.
- Challenges are a mix of politics, law, and defending Parliamentary privileges.
What challenges did not get backing?
Looking at the challenges that did not succeed is helpful.
- Anything tabled by the ECR or ID does not pass in the Committee or plenary.
- Pro-industry challenges fail.
- The Cordon sanitaire for the ID is alive.
- Single MEP challenges don’t tend to secure support.
- If it is not backed by the Environment Committee, and a group table the challenge to the plenary, it will fall.
Broader Observations
If you listen to the challenges you will learn they are about broader political issues. GMO challenges are about deforestation in the Amazon.
It is useful to listen to the issues that are driving the concerns of MEPs.
It is clear that any substance that can be suggested as an endocrine disruptor or carcinogenic has few political friends.
Looking at how the MEPs are voting is a useful indicator of how they will vote on future ordinary legislation. For some, like GMOs, there is broad and significant cross Party opposition in the EP.
The Commission’s follow-up responses to successful challenges are useful. They have ignored all implementing act challenges. For RPS measures and delegated acts, they can’t continue.
If timing is a challenge for the EP to undertake the proper scrutiny, the Commission will withdraw the proposal, rather than offending the EP.
It is a considerable amount of work to prepare a successful challenge. I estimate around a week’s work. It is not a small undertaking and not done lightly.
The time you know a challenge has started and the vote is short. If passed, you usually have two weeks before it goes to the plenary.
Most secondary legislation gets adopted without any detailed oversight.