Tuesday

16th Jan 2018

Analysis

EU governments duck responsibility on dieselgate

  • Dutch transport minister Melanie Schultz van Haegen (Photo: The Council of the European Union)

When a public official tells you that you have asked “good questions”, that says nothing about the quality of the answers.

This week, EUobserver asked Dutch transport minister Melanie Schultz van Haegen some questions about the widespread practice of car companies installing software in their cars that reduces the effect of the emissions control system.

Thank you for reading EUobserver!

Subscribe now for a 30 day free trial.

  1. €150 per year
  2. or €15 per month
  3. Cancel anytime

EUobserver is an independent, not-for-profit news organization that publishes daily news reports, analysis, and investigations from Brussels and the EU member states. We are an indispensable news source for anyone who wants to know what is going on in the EU.

We are mainly funded by advertising and subscription revenues. As advertising revenues are falling fast, we depend on subscription revenues to support our journalism.

For group, corporate or student subscriptions, please contact us. See also our full Terms of Use.

If you already have an account click here to login.

  • Maybe a selfie would have been better (Photo: The Council of the European Union)

Her answers were indicative of the lack of responsibility member states wish to take for the regulatory environment in which not only Volkswagen, but virtually all car companies have been allowed to break EU limits on pollutant emissions.

The questions were raised at the press conference held after a meeting of transport ministers in Luxembourg on Tuesday (7 June), a meeting which Schultz van Haegen chaired because her country holds the rotating six-month EU presidency.

Ministers had discussed what Schultz van Haegen had called a “need to clarify” EU rules, which include an exception saying that defeat devices are allowed if they are needed to protect the engine.

Germany had proposed to change the wording after it found out in April that the exception was used as a loophole by car companies, with some of them shutting down or reducing the effectiveness of emissions control systems merely when it is colder than 17C outside.

In a stunning conclusion, the German transport ministry had said in April the current rules “cause legal uncertainties among manufacturers and are not a sufficient basis to help type approval authorities to distinguish between lawful and unlawful defeat devices and to take legal action against the latter”.

The mentioned rules were proposed by the European Commission in December 2005, and signed into law in June 2007, after agreement by member states and the EU parliament.

'I don't know'

The engine exception, laid down in article 5.2 of the relevant regulation, was already in the original proposal. Why didn't anybody for more than a decade notice that it could cause legal uncertainties?

“I don't know why in the past this wasn't part of the debate,” said the Dutch minister.

“But as you know since the Volkswagen discussion, this is part of the debate. Everybody is now saying how can it be that there is a difference between the real driving emission test and the laboratory test?”.

That's why, Schultz van Haegen added, she had agreed to put a debate about article 5.2 on the agenda.

“To see if it still gives room for interpretation. The commissioner says: 'Well, it's very clear, but I'm going to clarify it again, and everybody who misused it, has to be fined, has to be punished'. I think it's important to really look into it, if it's really really clear, and if there is something we want to change for the future, for example, as I mentioned, to promote the newest, best technologies.”

The transcript of her answer might be a bit difficult to read and the answer may sound a bit convoluted because English is not her native language.

But it is clear that she did not wish to take responsibility for the lack of action by the Dutch government.

Her party, the centre-right Liberals, were part of the coalition government until four months before the rules were adopted, and for almost seven of the past 10 years.

Is a €19,500 fine 'dissuasive'?

The Dutch government, like other member states, were supposed to put in place “effective, proportionate, and dissuasive” penalties on the use of defeat devices.

Instead, several member states have fines that are lower than €20,000 - a fraction of the several billions in euros that car companies make.

Did minister Schultz van Haegen believe these fines - €19,500 in the Netherlands - were dissuasive?

“The fines, I haven't looked into that. But of course, you're right, they are relatively low towards the profits you can make. This is something we can also have a look at for the future,” she said.

“I didn't think about the fines before,” she responded to a follow-up question.

“This can be interesting, but I'm not saying now that we're going to do that in the Netherlands. I don't know if that's a national or European discussion on the fines.”

It's national. Each member state still has the sovereign power to determine the size of the fines, which is why the EU commission was unable to change the fact that some of them were so laughably low.

A third and final question.

Critics are arguing that because the EU rules require emissions control systems to operate during normal use of the car, a defeat device should not be allowed to switch it off when the temperature is at a level that can be considered normal in Europe, like lower than 17C, even if the device is there to protect the engine.

The commissioner said ...

When this website asked why no single national authority has taken legal action against any of the carmakers, Schultz van Haegen defected the question.

“Why the national countries didn't start any procedures? This is something that the commissioner also said. She said: 'We make the rules, but the national authorities should be very clear on what's allowed and what's not allowed'. She asked the member states in the debate also to take the own responsibility, and not only the responsibility by the commission, but also the own responsibility of the different member states.”

That was not an answer, but a summary of what EU industry commissioner Elzbieta Bienkowska had said at Tuesday's discussion.

Schultz van Haegen spoke as EU president, on behalf of member states. Perhaps she tried to stay neutral as president.

But as a consequence, she spoke more about member state governments as amorphous entities, instead of as elected public servants who owe their voters a better explanation of what went wrong.

Ironically, instead of taking Bienkowska's advice and lay out what individual countries like the Netherlands or Germany would do, the Dutch minister only said that her country is waiting for the results of emissions tests.

To the future!

During the debate, none of Schultz van Haegen's colleagues unambiguously took the mantle of blame to say how their respective governments could have done better. Instead, everyone wants to look to the future.

The same went for Schultz van Haegen.

“You can always look back and say: 'Why haven't we done this before?'. But I think that when you see that something goes wrong, it's important to immediately address it, and this is what happened this time.”

This comment does not bode well for those waiting for avowals.

During the press conference, Schultz van Haegen elicited some smiles when she took a photo with her smartphone of the audience - a small handful of journalists that had made the journey to Luxembourg.

But perhaps it would have been better if she, and her colleagues, had taken a selfie.

Some self-reflection among Europe's ministers is long overdue.

EU states dodge comment on damning emissions report

A European Parliament inquiry found that national governments showed "maladministration" in the Dieselgate file. But at a press conference, a representative of those governments did not want to comment.

Interview

Learn from US on emissions, says former EPA chief

Europe should increase fines on emissions-cheating software and monitor carmakers more closely, says a former senior official at the US Environmental Protection Agency.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. ILGA EuropeFreedom of Movement and Same-Sex Couples in Romania – Case Update!
  2. EU2017EEEstonia Completes First EU Presidency, Introduced New Topics to the Agenda
  3. Bio-Based IndustriesLeading the Transition Towards a Post-Petroleum Society
  4. ACCAWelcomes the Start of the New Bulgarian Presidency
  5. Mission of China to the EUPremier Li and President Tusk Stress Importance of Ties at ASEM Summit
  6. EU2017EEVAT on Electronic Commerce: New Rules Adopted
  7. European Jewish CongressChair of EU Parliament Working Group on Antisemitism Condemns Wave of Attacks
  8. Counter BalanceA New Study Challenges the Infrastructure Mega Corridors Agenda
  9. Dialogue PlatformThe Gülen Community: Who to Believe - Politicians or Actions?" by Thomas Michel
  10. Plastics Recyclers Europe65% Plastics Recycling Rate Attainable by 2025 New Study Shows
  11. European Heart NetworkCommissioner Andriukaitis' Address to EHN on the Occasion of Its 25th Anniversary
  12. ACCACFOs Risk Losing Relevance If They Do Not Embrace Technology

Latest News

  1. Post-Brexit trade roll-over not automatic, EU paper says
  2. Oettinger pushes plastic tax but colleagues express doubts
  3. MEPs target exports of cyber surveillance tech
  4. Kosovo killing halts EU talks in Brussels
  5. ECB withheld information on 'flawed' bank supervision
  6. Fewer MEPs than visitors turn up for Estonian PM
  7. EU names China and Russia as top hackers
  8. Ten Commandments to overcome the EU's many crises

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. UNICEFMake the Digital World Safer for Children & Increase Access for the Most Disadvantaged
  2. European Jewish CongressWelcomes Recognition of Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel and Calls on EU States to Follow Suit
  3. Mission of China to the EUChina and EU Boost Innovation Cooperation Under Horizon 2020
  4. European Gaming & Betting AssociationJuncker’s "Political" Commission Leaves Gambling Reforms to the Court
  5. AJC Transatlantic InstituteAJC Applauds U.S. Recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital City
  6. EU2017EEEU Telecom Ministers Reached an Agreement on the 5G Roadmap
  7. European Friends of ArmeniaEU-Armenia Relations in the CEPA Era: What's Next?
  8. Mission of China to the EU16+1 Cooperation Injects New Vigour Into China-EU Ties
  9. EPSUEU Blacklist of Tax Havens Is a Sham
  10. EU2017EERole of Culture in Building Cohesive Societies in Europe
  11. ILGA EuropeCongratulations to Austria - Court Overturns Barriers to Equal Marriage
  12. Centre Maurits CoppietersCelebrating Diversity, Citizenship and the European Project With Fundació Josep Irla

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. European Healthy Lifestyle AllianceUnderstanding the Social Consequences of Obesity
  2. Union for the MediterraneanMediterranean Countries Commit to Strengthening Women's Role in Region
  3. European Heart NetworkThe Time Is Ripe for Simplified Front-Of-Pack Nutrition Labelling
  4. Counter BalanceNew EU External Investment Plan Risks Sidelining Development Objectives
  5. EU2017EEEAS Calls for Eastern Partnership Countries to Enter EU Market Through Estonia
  6. Dialogue PlatformThe Turkey I No Longer Know
  7. World Vision7 Million Children at Risk in the DRC: Donor Meeting to Focus on Saving More Lives
  8. EPSU-Eurelectric-IndustriAllElectricity European Social Partners Stand up for Just Energy Transition
  9. European Friends of ArmeniaSignature of CEPA Marks a Fresh Start for EU-Armenia Relations
  10. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic Energy Ministers Pledge to Work More Closely at Nordic and EU Level
  11. European Friends of ArmeniaPresident Sargsyan Joined EuFoA Honorary Council Inaugural Meeting
  12. International Partnership for Human RightsEU Leaders Should Press Azerbaijan President to End the Detention of Critics