26th Oct 2016


Verheugen did not think VW cheating was morally possible

  • 'I didn't think it was possible from a technical point of view', said Verheugen about VW's cheating (Photo: European Parliament)

Volkswagen's cheating on emissions tests “was not something anyone suspected”, former European commissioner Guenther Verheugen told members of the European Parliament in a hearing on Tuesday (30 August).

“I didn't even think it was possible, from a moral point of view. Also, I didn't think it was possible from a technical point of view,” said Verheugen, adding that the commission did not have “the slightest suspicion”.

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.

However, he did note that some parts of the legislation he was responsible for could have been worded more precisely.

Verheugen, who was Germany's commissioner from 2004 to 2010, appeared as a witness in the EU parliament's inquiry committee into the Dieselgate scandal. MEPs wanted to know whether he could have done more to try and prevent the emissions cheating.

The German ex-politician, who now works as a consultant, had previously declined the invitation multiple times because he questioned “whether it was procedurally correct for a former member to speak on behalf of the commission”.

Verheugen is responsible for the current regulation in place with regards to emissions from passenger vehicles, which was updated in 2007. It included a ban on cheating software, known as defeat devices, which had remained virtually unchanged since 1998.

He said he “did not know” why an obligation to report the use of defeat devices for manufacturers of trucks. introduced in 2001, and for manufacturers of motorcycles, in 2002, was not also introduced for manufacturers of passenger vehicles in the reform of 2007.

“It is not a question I was asked. I can't shake an answer out of my sleeve,” Verheugen said.

He also said he was “not aware” of the fact that a deadline from the 2007 legislation was missed by all member states in January 2009.

The deadline involved an obligation to report to the commission how EU countries implemented the requirement to introduce penalties for the use of defeat devices.

Verheugen was commissioner until February 2010, a year after the deadline passed. But he noted the commission always allows member states “a certain amount of time” to implement requirements. Only then would an infringement procedure begin.

“The commission doesn't do this if there is a delay of only six months or a year,” he said.

The former official also stressed that the regulation on car emissions was “not vague”, and that it was clear that the limits on dangerous emissions applied to the real world, and not the test labs, as some carmakers have argued in front of the inquiry MEPs.

However, Verheugen did reflect on an exception that exists in the legislation.

Carmakers were, and are, allowed to use defeat devices if they are meant to protect the engine. This has effectively turned into a loophole for companies whose cars emit much more than the EU limits.

The exceptions existed in previous legislation, and according to Verheugen no one asked to take it out, or adapt it.

“We collectively did not see this,” he told MEPs.

“This particular issue of the exceptions to the ban, should have been worded with greater clarity ... If one could do this all over again, then of course I would propose that on this particular point that we look at it much more closely, and word it in a completely different fashion.”


One year on: Dieselgate keeps getting bigger

One year ago, it emerged that VW had cheated on emission tests in what came to be called the Dieselgate affair. EUobserver looked at how it happened and what the EU did to stop it.


Dieselgate: Looking under the hood

EUobserver will closely follow the hearings and research done by the EU parliament's inquiry committee, as well as investigate aspects of the diesel emissions scandal not covered by the committee's mandate.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. EFADraft Bill for a 2nd Scottish Independence Referendum
  2. UNICEFCalls on European Council to Address Plight of Refugee and Migrant Children
  3. ECTAJoin us on 9-10 November in Brussels and Discover the new EU Digital Landscape
  4. Access NowCan you Hear me now? Verizon’s Opportunity to Stand for Global Users
  5. Belgrade Security ForumMeaningful Dialogue Missing Not Only in the Balkans, but Throughout Europe
  6. EuropecheEU Fishing Sector Celebrates Sustainably Sourced Seafood in EU Parliament
  7. World VisionWomen and Girls Urge EU Leadership to Help end Gender-based Violence
  8. Dialogue PlatformIs Jihadism Blind Spot of Western Intellectuals ? Wednesday 26 October
  9. Belgrade Security ForumGet the Latest News and Updates on the Belgrade Security Forum @BelSecForum
  10. Crowdsourcing Week EuropeMaster Crowdsourcing, Crowdfunding and Innovation! Conference 21 November - 10% Discount Code CSWEU16
  11. EJCEU Parliament's Roadmap for Relations with Iran a Massive Missed Opportunity
  12. Nordic Council of MinistersFish Skin on Bare Skin: Turning Fish Waste into Sustainable Fashion