BRUSSELS — When it comes to simplifying the European Union’s green rulebook, experts just get in the way.
That, at least, seems to be the view of EU member countries, which have sidelined experts from formal discussions on how to reduce green rules — in an unusual move designed to speed up the passage of controversial red-tape-slashing legislation.
In February the European Commission proposed landmark reforms reopening several EU laws at once to radically cut down environmental reporting obligations for companies.
Since then, lawmakers in the European Parliament and country delegations in the Council of the EU have been assessing the proposal, as companies wait in hope of looser rules.
But some diplomats working in the Council — the institution that represents the governments of the 27 member countries in Brussels — complain that the process of actually reducing that red tape is “a mess,” because national envoys appointed to review the files are not experts on the topic.
They say a deliberate political decision was taken to distance technical experts from the simplification work in order to fast-track the process of reducing the regulatory burden. Not everyone is happy with that choice, POLITICO learned from speaking with a dozen diplomats, Council officials and lobbyists.
As the EU introduces more “omnibus” packages simplifying rules on everything from chemicals to energy, financial services and agriculture, officials warn that the sidelining of experts could become routine.
Some argue that the absence of experts in the negotiation process makes it easier for bold cuts to be made to environmental rules. “Any expert you talk to that knows the subject matter will side with the progressive side of the argument,” said one lobbyist following the file.
The Antici Group
Poland, which currently helms the presidency of the Council, was in charge of setting up the working structure to deal with the process for EU government representatives. It opted to create an ad-hoc group of high-ranking diplomats, known in diplomatic jargon as “horizontal attachés,” to deal with it.
The group sits in an informal body in the Council known as the Antici Group, where diplomats work with EU ambassadors on a range of high stakes political issues. That means the officials previously in charge of negotiating the laws targeted by the EU’s simplification drive now sit in the background, unable to chime in.
The decision was approved last February by European affairs ministers — and it was deliberate. “The idea is [that] we need to simplify it as fast as possible, and we cannot repeat the expert discussions and the expert haggling,” one EU diplomat told POLITICO at the time.
But some argue that the work lacks depth as a result.
“The problem is that the [diplomatic officials appointed] don’t always understand what’s happening because it’s very technical,” said another EU diplomat, who like others in this story was granted anonymity to speak candidly about an internal process.
A third EU diplomat complained that the task force is expected to assess the Commission’s proposal at lightning speed and that the national envoys on this task force “have to be extremely fast,” leading to a lack of oversight on some of the crucial details.
A fourth expressed doubt as to whether this new way of working actually improves the quality of the legislation.
Following last year’s European election the Commission has already announced nine simplification packages, covering areas of EU policy including the creation of a new category of small to mid-sized companies, simplifying how the EU distributes its agricultural budget, and paring back rules on artificial intelligence. Four have already been presented, with the rest expected this year.
The Antici Group simplification task force could be put in charge of all of them.
Getting benched
The first omnibus simplification package aims to reduce paperwork for businesses by changing EU laws on corporate sustainability reporting and supply chain due diligence.
The laws require businesses to share information about their environmental footprints and exposure to climate risk, and to police their supply chains for possible human rights violations or damage to ecosystems. Companies must also report how they plan to meet net-zero emissions by 2050. The co-legislators are also reviewing the EU Taxonomy, which defines what counts as a sustainable investment.
All were part of the European Green Deal, a flagship program of Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s first term, and involved lengthy negotiations among elected officials, diplomats and their teams of experts working behind closed doors, who spent hours drafting the final text.
Now, new teams of diplomats and lawmakers are taking a fresh look at the laws and questioning whether the EU has gone too far in its green legislative drive. They are examining the Commission’s pitch to radically change technical aspects of the laws, including dropping sector-specific reporting standards and cutting an EU-wide civil liability regime.
Two other diplomats explained to POLITICO that the experts on the file sit in the second row behind the coordinators and are not allowed to say anything during the negotiation sessions.
The experts feel “that it is a shame they can’t speak, because they know the file in substance, whereas the lead speakers for [an EU country] do not have the deep knowledge — so they are more prone to agree to something,” one of them said.
“Of course, they can draft lines for the speaker [to read],” they added.
The Polish presidency defends its structure. “One of the priorities of the Polish presidency is simplification. European leaders and a growing number of stakeholders have called for it and there is a need to make EU laws clearer and simpler in order to support economic growth and increase competitiveness,” said a spokesperson for the Polish presidency.
“It was a common proposal by the presidencies trio [Poland, Denmark and Cyprus] which we were happy to present.”
Several other Council officials from different country delegations also told POLITICO they were not overly concerned by the working structure. One noted that it’s up to the member countries “to decide how they organize [themselves].”
The simplification of green disclosure rules has become so political that even heads of state and their governments are involved. Both French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz have called for the supply chain rules to be scrapped altogether.
In Germany, the EU’s due diligence law became one of the most contested issues in the coalition agreement.
Last month over 30 legal experts warned of the potentially adverse impacts of scrapping the mandatory green transition plans currently required of companies — one of the technical changes proposed by the Commission in the omnibus simplification package.
The legal experts argued that “removing, weakening, or delaying keystone legislation mandating corporate transition plans in line with international commitments runs counter to [country] obligations” to report on greenhouse gas emissions from the corporate sector.
