ENERGY EFFICIENT LABELLING PROGRAMME FOR
OFFICE AND RELATED EQUIPMENT
(a)
(20362)
9884/99
COM(99) 328
| Draft Council Decision concerning the conclusion on behalf of the
European Community of an agreement between the United States of
America and the European Community on the Co-ordination of Energy-
Efficient Labelling Programmes.
|
(b)
(20963)
5702/00
COM(00) 18
|
Draft Council Regulation on a Community energy efficiency labelling
programme for office and communication technology equipment.
|
| Legal base:
| (a) Articles 175(1) and 300(2) EC; qualified majority voting
(b) Article 95 EC; co-decision; qualified majority voting
|
| |
| Document originated:
| (a) 1 July 1999
(b) 28 January 2000
|
| Forwarded to the Council:
| (a) 5 July 1999
(b) 31 January 2000
|
| Deposited in Parliament:
| (a) 10 August 1999
(b) 15 February 2000
|
| Department: |
Environment, Transport and the Regions
|
| Basis of consideration:
| (a) EM of 13 September 1999
(b) EM of 22 February 2000
(both) Minister's letter and SEM of 26 May 2000
|
| Previous Committee Report:
| None |
| Discussed in Council:
| 30 May 2000 |
| Committee's assessment:
| Politically important |
| Committee's decision:
| (both) Not cleared; awaiting further information
|
Background
4.1 According to the Commission, office equipment
accounts for a large proportion of electricity consumption in
the tertiary sector, and is moreover one of the fastest growing
areas of consumption, due to the rate of growth of the service
sector and increased use of information technology. It points
out that, under the SAVE[10]
programme, action has already been taken to reduce the electricity
consumption of all major end-use devices (including minimum efficiency
standards, labelling and other consumer information action), and
that, in the case of office equipment, it is generally agreed
that the most effective approach is to reduce power consumption
when it is in the stand-by mode, by means of a voluntary labelling
programme.
4.2 In this connection, the Commission had earlier
drawn specific attention to the Energy Star Program, which was
introduced in the United States in 1993. This has now become the
de facto required standard for office equipment sold on
the US market, resulting in a high level of manufacturer participation
and raised consumer awareness, and the Commission had seen advantages
in the Community becoming an equal partner alongside the US in
running the programme, setting its technical standards, and thereby
building upon the use of an already well recognised logo in the
Community market. With this in mind, it had in 1996 sought, and
obtained from the Council, a mandate to negotiate a binding agreement
with the United States on the co-ordination of labelling programmes
for energy-efficient office equipment. The Community has now presented
two further documents to the Council, in the light of its discussions
with the US authorities.
The current documents
4.3 The first (document(a)) comprises a draft
Council Decision concerning the conclusion of a five year agreement
between the Community and the USA, under which the Commission
would have the authority to manage and operate the agreement on
behalf of the Energy Council. This document was the subject of
an Explanatory Memorandum of 13 September 1999 from the Parliamentary
Under-Secretary of State at the Department of the Environment,
Transport and the Regions (Lord Whitty) in which he said that,
although the proposal was consistent with the Government's policy
objectives to encourage energy efficient products and improved
consumer information, and with the Commission's commitments in
this area, much — including any subsidiarity implications
— would depend upon the way in which it was implemented
(see paragraph 4.4 below). He also said that the legal base for
the proposed decision had still to be finalised, and that, although
the Commission had indicated that some funding would be available
from the SAVE programme, the primary costs of promoting and enforcing
the scheme would fall on Member States.
4.4 The second document is a draft Council Regulation,
which would complement the Council Decision by setting out the
detailed mode of operation of the agreement, together with the
obligations of the Member States arising from their participation.
In particular, it would describe the conditions for the use of
the Energy Star logo, prohibit its misuse, and establish the general
rules and procedures for the resulting Community programme, including
the procedures for any revisions, for example as regards both
the technical specifications and product groups covered. In addition,
Member States would have to appoint a national body to give technical
advice to the Commission, to participate in a Community-wide Energy
Star Board, and to act as an information point for the public.
4.5 This latter proposal was dealt with by the
Minister in a separate Explanatory Memorandum of 22 February 2000,
in which he confirmed that the Regulation was necessary to ensure
that the scheme can be effectively implemented within the Community.
He also said that manufacturers, consumers and retailers were
being consulted, and that the outcome of that consultation would
be reported on in a subsequent Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum,
which would be accompanied by a Regulatory Impact Assessment.
We therefore decided to await this further information, and any
further information regarding the legal base for the proposed
Council Decision, before deciding whether, and in what terms,
to report to the House.
Minister's letter and Supplementary
Explanatory Memorandum of 26 May 2000
4.6 We have now received from the Minister a
letter and Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum of 26 May 2000
covering both these documents. As regards the proposed Council
Decision (document (a)), he said that it had now been decided
that the appropriate legal base was Article 175(1), and that the
Energy Council on 30 May would be asked to make a decision to
sign the agreement, leaving decisions to conclude it, and to adopt
the draft Regulation (document (b)), to a later date, following
consultations with the European Parliament. He went on to say
that, although this Council would take place before formal scrutiny
clearance could be obtained, he believed it was in the UK's interest
to sign up as quickly as possible to the Energy Star Scheme, given
the potential energy (and cost) savings that would arise, and
the general support for it from industry. However, the Minister
also said that it was not yet possible to offer a full report
on the consultation exercise or the promised Regulatory Impact
Assessment, as he is awaiting the result of discussions with small
businesses affected by the proposed Regulation. A further detailed
Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum covering a Regulatory Impact
Assessment would therefore follow in mid to late June after consultation.
Conclusion
4.7 Even though the rationale for the proposed
Agreement seems sensible, we had taken a conscious decision to
delay considering these two documents until we had received the
Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum and Regulatory Impact Assessment
promised by the Minister in his Explanatory Memorandum of 22 February.
We are disturbed, therefore, to be presented with a situation
where, before this information is available, the Community will
apparently have committed itself to an Agreement (albeit on the
basis that a further Council Decision will be needed to conclude
the Agreement). We note that the Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum
and Regulatory Impact Assessment will be available later this
month, and, when these are provided, we would like the Minister
to explain whether, and to what extent, the decisions still needing
to be taken within the Council on the Agreement and the implementing
Regulation would be susceptible to amendment should this be thought
necessary in the light of any information contained in the Assessment.
We would also like him to say whether the areas of uncertainty
identified in his Explanatory Memorandum of 13 September 1999
— including those relating to subsidiarity — have
now been satisfactorily resolved. We infer from what he has since
said that this is the case, but we would welcome explicit reassurance
on this point. In the meantime, we are not clearing these two
documents.
10 Specific Actions for Vigorous Energy Efficiency. Back
|
