7 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY
(27030)
14335/05
COM(05) 447
+ ADD 1
| Draft Directive on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe
Commission Staff Working Paper: Annex to the Commission
Communication "Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution" and the Directive on
Ambient Air Quality and Cleaner Air for Europe - Impact Assessment
|
| Legal base | Article 175EC; co-decision; QMV
|
| Department | Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
|
| Basis of consideration |
SEM of 16 December 2005 |
| Previous Committee Report |
HC 34-xiv (2005-06), para 3 (11 January 2006) |
| To be discussed in Council
| No date set |
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared
|
Background
7.1 As we noted in our Report of 11 January 2006, the Commission
has sought in this document to give legislative effect to the
intentions in the Communication it produced in September 2005[27]
setting out a Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution. As such, the
proposal would retain the obligations which Member States are
currently required to meet under the Air Quality Framework Directive
(1996/62/EC) and three of its "daughter" Directives,[28]
but, in addition to allowing them more time to comply, it would
introduce a number of changes foreshadowed in the Thematic Strategy.
These include a non-mandatory provision to reduce ambient levels
of the more hazardous fine particles below 2.5 µm
in diameter (PM2.5) in 2020 by an average of 20% across
each Member State, with the aim of introducing a mandatory reduction
later; a mandatory annual average "concentration cap"
of 25µg
per m3 on such particles by 2010; and the introduction
of new monitoring requirements by the beginning of 2008, in order
to assess compliance.
7.2 We also noted that the Government was preparing
an initial Regulatory Impact Assessment, but that the Commission
had in the meantime considered the financial implications of implementing
the measures to which Member States are already committed (including
those in the proposed Directive which are confirmed from the current
legislation) and of meeting the new objectives proposed for fine
particles. It had concluded that the measures already committed
will cost €65 billion (£5 billion in the UK), but that,
despite the resultant improvement in air quality, the disbenefits
arising from damage to health in 2020 would still be between €189
and €609 billion a year (£15-43 billion in the UK).
It also put the cost of delivering in due course a mandatory reduction
in fine particle levels at about €5 billion a year across
the Community as a whole, but suggested that this would deliver
benefits of €36-119 billion.
7.3 Against this background, and bearing in mind
the intrinsic importance of the subject, we decided to draw these
more detailed legislative proposals on air quality to the attention
of the House, even though they had been foreshadowed in our Report
of 16 November 2005 on the Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution.
However, we said that we would take a final view on them once
we had received the Regulatory Impact Assessment which the Government
had said it would be providing.
Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum of 16 December
2005
7.4 The initial Regulatory Impact Assessment attached
to the supplementary Explanatory Memorandum of 16 December 2005
which we have now received from the Minister for Local Environment,
Marine and Animal Welfare at the Department for Environment, Food
and Rural Affairs (Mr Ben Bradshaw) has sought to assess the implications
of both the draft Directive as it currently stands and (in order
to aid the UK's negotiating position) of a number of possible
changes.
7.5 We have decided in this Report to concentrate
on the first of these approaches, where the Assessment suggests
that:
- since some of the current limits
set for larger particulate matter up to 10 µm
in diameter (PM10) and nitrogen dioxide may not be
met fully as things stand, the extended time limit for compliance
would increase the chances of those limits being met, and also
have an unquantified impact on the additional costs it would otherwise
have been necessary to incur: on the other hand, there would be
an unquantified health disbenefit;
- since the exposure reduction target for fine
particles is not mandatory, this would of itself be unlikely to
create any additional costs for the UK;
- the proposed concentration cap for fine particles
could be met without additional measures; and
- the costs associated with the need for additional
monitoring would be between £1.6 and £2.5 million a
year.
7.6 It follows, therefore, that the more significant
implications would arise were certain measures going beyond those
in the proposal to be taken. The Assessment says that this would
improve the UK's ability to meet the existing air quality targets
for nitrogen dioxide and larger particles; enable it to make progress
towards a mandatory exposure reduction target for fine particles
(though it is still unlikely that the 20% figure could be met
by 2020); and enable it to comply with a more stringent concentration
cap below the proposed 25µg
per m3. The additional costs and benefits this would
imply are inevitably somewhat speculative, but the Assessment
suggests that, if additional measures costing around £500
million a year were to be taken, the benefits could be between
£200 and £1,900 million a year. In other words, at the
lower end of this range, the costs would be greater than the benefits,
whilst at the upper end, the opposite would be the case.
Conclusion
7.7 Although the analyses contained in the Regulatory
Impact Assessment are complex, it seems evident that simply implementing
this proposal as currently drafted would give rise to relatively
low costs and benefits within the UK, and that much would depend
upon whether (and, if so, what) additional steps were to be taken
as a result of the negotiations on the present text. Consequently,
although we see no need at present for further consideration of
this document, we think it prudent to hold it under scrutiny,
and to ask the Minister to inform us if any changes giving rise
to significant additional costs or benefits are proposed. In the
meantime, we are drawing this latest information to the attention
of the House.
27 (27030) 14335/05; see HC 34-x (2005-06), para 8
(16 November 2005) and para 9 below. Back
28
Covering respectively sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, oxides
of nitrogen, particulate matter and lead; benzene and carbon monoxide;
and ozone. Back
|
