Wednesday

26th Apr 2017

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.

Dear EUobserver reader

Subscribe now for unrestricted access to EUobserver.

Sign up for 30 days' free trial, no obligation. Full subscription only 15 € / month or 150 € / year.

  1. Unlimited access on desktop and mobile
  2. All premium articles, analysis, commentary and investigations
  3. EUobserver archives

EUobserver is the only independent news media covering EU affairs in Brussels and all 28 member states.

♡ We value your support.

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.

News in Brief

  1. EU Commission launches probe into Hungary's university law
  2. Scots slowly losing appetite for independence - poll
  3. Council of Europe puts Turkey on watch list
  4. EU to put parental leave on political agenda
  5. Israel cancels German meeting over human rights groups
  6. Hungary's Orban will participate in EU parliament debate
  7. Malta floats cash-for-refugees plan
  8. Ivanka Trump to meet Merkel at Berlin women's conference

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. UNICEFRace Against Time to Save Millions of Lives in Yemen
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersDeveloping Independent Russian-Language Media in the Baltic Countries
  3. Swedish EnterprisesReform of the European Electricity Market: Lessons from the Nordics, Brussels 2 May
  4. Malta EU 2017Green Light Given for New EU Regulation to Bolster External Border Checks
  5. Counter BalanceCall for EU Commission to Withdraw Support of Trans-Adriatic Pipeline
  6. ACCAEconomic Confidence at Highest Since 2015
  7. European Federation of Allergy and Airways60%-90% of Your Life Is Spent Indoors. How Does Poor Indoor Air Quality Affect You?
  8. European Gaming and Betting AssociationCJEU Confirms Obligation for a Transparent Licensing Process
  9. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic Region and the US: A Time of Warlike Rhetoric and Militarisation?
  10. European Free AllianceEFA MEPs Vote in Favor of European Parliament's Brexit Mandate
  11. Mission of China to the EUXinhua Insight: China to Open up Like Never Before
  12. World VisionViolence Becomes New Normal for Syrian Children

Latest News

  1. European states still top media freedom list
  2. Let’s not put European public health at risk
  3. Threatened Budapest university calls for EU support
  4. Orban set to face down EU threats
  5. Dont expect 'quick fix' in Syria, China tells EU
  6. Russische schwarze Kassen bedrohen EU Demokratie
  7. Libya commanders in Brussels for migration talks
  8. Mixed review for EU asylum spots in Greece and Italy

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. International Partnership for Human RightsTime to Turn the Tide and End Repression of Central Asia's Civil Society
  2. European Free AllianceAutonomia to Normalnosc - Poland Urged to Re-Grant Autonomy to Silesia
  3. UNICEFHitting Rock Bottom - How 2016 Became the Worst Year for #ChildrenofSyria
  4. Malta EU 2017Green Light Given for New EU Regulation to Bolster External Border Checks
  5. ACCAG20 Citizens Want 'Big Picture' Tax Policymaking, According to Global Survey
  6. Belgrade Security ForumCall for Papers: European Union as a Global Crisis Manager - Deadline 30 April
  7. European Gaming & Betting Association60 Years Rome Treaty – 60 Years Building an Internal Market
  8. Malta EU 2017New EU Rules to Prevent Terrorism and Give More Rights to Victims Approved
  9. European Jewish Congress"Extremists Still Have Ability and Motivation to Murder in Europe" Says EJC President
  10. European Gaming & Betting AssociationAudiovisual Media Services Directive to Exclude Minors from Gambling Ads
  11. ILGA-EuropeTime for a Reality Check on International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
  12. UNICEFHuman Cost to Refugee and Migrant Children Mounts Up One Year After EU-Turkey Deal