Four countries have been referred to the EU Court of Justice for failing to transpose the Waste Framework Directive into national law. Continued non-compliance with the directive could result in financial sanctions against the countries.
The Waste Framework Directive was designed to tackle the three billion tonnes of waste that the EU generates each year. It lays down a binding commitment for member states to reduce, recycle or recover their waste before disposing of it. The countries in question will be expected to legislate for the most recent framework.
The European Parliament and Council passed the framework on 19 November 2008 with a deadline for transposition into member states’ national law by 12 December 2010. Twenty-three infringement proceedings were opened in January of last year, of which only six remain open.
Infringement proceedings begin with a formal notice, then advance to a reasoned opinion, a formal request that the country outline the steps it will take to bring it into line with EU law within a specified time period, usually two months. If the country is still non-compliant or the European Commission is unsatisfied with their response, the case can be referred to the European Court of Justice.
After failing to transpose the legislation, despite being sent a reasoned opinion, Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia have been referred to the Court of Justice. The EU Environment Commissioner Janez Potocnik has recommended to the court that penalty payments, based on the seriousness and duration of the infringements, be imposed until the member states comply. Suggested fines will range from €15,220 to €67,314 per day.
Belgium has been given a second reasoned opinion for lack of compliance on the same legislation. It will have two months in which to pass the law, before facing the Court of Justice and possible sanctions.
Germany was served with a reasoned opinion to comply with the directive on 27 January.
"We need to see waste as a resource – and to bury that resource in the ground is worse than short-sighted”, says Potocnik. “Waste management and recycling can make a big contribution to economic growth and job creation. If the existing legislation was implemented properly, we could avoid costly clean-up operations, pollution and health problems.”
Get our weekly digest
resource.co article ai
How will the government and DMOs address the challenges of including glass in DRS while ensuring a level playing field across the UK?
There's no easy solution to include glass in the DRS while maintaining a level playing field. Potential approaches include a phased introduction of glass, potentially with higher deposits to reflect its logistical challenges. The government and DMOs could incentivise innovation in glass packaging design and subsidise dedicated return points for glass-handling. Exemptions for smaller businesses unable to handle glass might also be necessary. Any successful solution will likely blend several approaches. It must address the differing priorities of devolved administrations, balance environmental benefits with logistical and cost implications, and be supported by robust consumer education campaigns emphasizing the importance of glass recycling.