WRITTEN QUESTION E-2241/02

by Torben Lund (PSE) to the Commission

(23 July 2002)

Subject: Call for eco-labels to be financed from taxes on chemicals

Regulation (EC) No 1980/2000 of 17 July 2000(1) states that the aim of eco-labelling is to award an eco-label in order to promote products with a reduced environmental impact during their entire life cycle and to provide consumers with accurate, non-deceptive and scientifically based information on the environmental impact of products.

In many ways, the scheme is a success but it suffers from two main drawbacks. Consumers lack information about eco-labels and companies are faced with major economic and administrative burdens when a product is due to be awarded such a label.

Can the Commission therefore explain what measures have been taken in accordance with Article 10 of the Regulation on promotion of the eco-label and state what future initiatives it expects to take under Article 10?

Can it also state what costs it believes ought to be imposed on companies in order to obtain a licence? Finally, can it indicate whether it intends to abolish the one-off application fee and the fees payable for the use of eco-labels, possibly by restructuring the financing of the scheme so that eco-labels are funded from taxes on hazardous substances and materials, e.g. PVCs, phthalates and brominated flame retardants? Abolition of the application fee and annual fees would be in line with the polluter pays principle. In addition, such a measure would guide production in a more environment-friendly direction, since it would become attractive to invest in environmental improvements and uneconomical to continue using hazardous chemical substances in the production process.

(1) OJ L 237, 21.9.2000, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(4 September 2002)

The Honourable Member is correct in stressing the importance of the Community eco-label, which is a voluntary instrument and needs to be actively marketed. The different stakeholders involved, Member States, Commission, competent bodies and interest groups, have in recent years placed much more emphasis on marketing and promotion than earlier when technical development of criteria took up much of the resources. As a result, considerable progress has been made in attracting new companies and the number of licence holders has doubled to 119 in the last 18 months, with over 54 million articles currently bearing the Flower logo.

Nevertheless, there is obviously still much work to be done in promoting the scheme, and in 2001 some EUR 1,6 million were spent on marketing. As part of the eco-label working plan recently adopted by the Commission(1) the various persons involved in marketing within the Community Eco-labelling Board have formed a marketing management group to co-ordinate their actions and to make the best use of the resources available. Their work can be followed on the Commission eco-label web-site (http://europa.eu.int/ecolabel), which has over 75 000 visits per month.

The fees are a necessary source of financing for developing and promoting the eco-label, and complement the direct financing by the Commission and the Member States. The Commission carried out a long consultation with the different stakeholders in preparing the recent revision of the Decision establishing the eco-label fees. The structure adopted in November 2000(2) balanced the different positions of the stakeholders, and introduced a series of reductions as well as a ceiling. The application fee is between 300 and EUR 1 300, and the annual fee is 0,15 % of the ex-factory sales price with a ceiling of EUR 25 000. Significant reductions are available for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), developing countries, and those that have Community eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS) or International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001, with other reductions possible.

From our discussions with different companies, it is clear that the level of fees is not the key factor in deciding whether or not to apply, and there is no pressure from stakeholders for the time being to further revise the fee structure. The Commission therefore does not intend to abolish the fees. The Commission has not foreseen a proposal for a tax on hazardous substances or materials in its work programme.

(1) OJ L 7, 11.1.2002.

(2) OJ L 293, 22.11.2000.