M. Sigmar Gabriel

Interview with M. Sigmar Gabriel, Federal Minister of Environment, Germany

Download PDF version

According to you, what are the main issues in waste policies today : in Europe, and/or in your country?

To my opinion, three main challenges have to be met.

First, the new European Waste Framework Directive should enable the creation of a “fundamental law on waste” for the 30 years to come. We know the problems (increasingly scarce resources, climatic change, soils, water and air pollution), but for most of them, we also know the solutions. The goal of the new directive is to apply these solutions in Europe and in each country without delay.

Second, there are big differences between the waste disposal organization and technical norms of the 27 UE State Members. It is vital to reach and apply uniform and as high standards as possible, if only for an equitable competition – we owe that to the environment.

Third, waste management is an innovative economic and job-creating sector. The need for efficient techniques globally is huge. Europe has a chance to promote its role of pioneer in this field: this is what we are particularly committed to achieving during the German presidency.

How urgent do you regard issues of waste production prevention on the one hand and the recycling of waste on the other, issues that are at very heart of current changes to European regulations (Thematic Strategy and draft Framework Directive)?

The objectives are the same: save natural resources, optimise their efficiency and suppress the dumping of harmful substances into the environment. These objectives, of course, aim at protecting climate and resources. We can realise them in different manners: thanks to a quantitative prevention, i.e. by reducing resource consumption, and thanks to a qualitative prevention, i.e. by reducing harmful substances in the economic cycle. This goes hand in hand with an increase in productivity. The intelligent use of natural resources and energy sources, with the closing of cycles for example, or the reintroduction of raw material originating from waste into the economic cycle, offer a huge potential.

In Europe, we essentially support the idea that prevention needs to be encouraged, while abiding by objectives in terms of prosperity, employment and economic growth. You see, “productivity of resources without privation” may be obtained thanks to sustainable waste management. However, to reach this level, big efforts and investments are still required – this is what I mean by “environment-friendly industrial policy”.

Do you believe that this European regulation is moving in the right direction?

Not surprisingly, the various interests of states and economic sectors are being voiced in the discussions of the European Parliament and Council. It would be a pity not to seize the chance to define a stable waste policy now. On the other hand, fake compromises supposed to reconcile illusions and cost reduction will not be enough. I will do my utmost during the German Presidency to feed progressive ideas into the debate and to avoid any unnecessary regulation. In this context, legal security is an essential prerequisite in terms of planning and investment. We owe that to stakeholders, as there is not such a thing as a modern waste policy going against the economy.

What is your perception of the various waste realities in the European area: in each of the Member States or between the different Member States?

I see a gap between North and South Europe but also between East and West, which is due in particular to Member States’ different accession dates. Differences are also to be observed in how strong their will is to invest into infrastructure and in how difficult a matter social acceptability can be in some states and regions. Environment-related investments are often still not considered as a priority compared to other infrastructure moves. This must and this is going to change – environment and resources are inevitably going to become a restricting factor in the future evolution of economy, as is today illustrated by the increase in the price of raw materials. However, the bigger the interest for these issues, the higher the investments to continue to support economic development. The ones who will accept this first will be the winners.

What is your perception of the challenges posed by the social acceptability of waste and waste treatment plants: how should we inform the population? How should we involve the population?

For both citizens and the economy, investing in environment protection means investing in the future. Let me quote what the great German writer Kurt Tucholsky wrote in his time: "Am besten wäre ein Haus mitten in Berlin mit Blick auf die Alpen und die Ostsee." (The ideal would be a house in the centre of Berlin with a view on the Alps and the Baltic Sea.) Everybody would like to enjoy both nature and the advantages of industrial society. But some disadvantages will have to be accepted, for throwing one’s garbage into the neighbour’s garden never was a solution.

This issue has long been debated in Germany, and I am glad to see that the acceptability problems encountered in the past have mainly been overcome. There are now confirmed processes such as mediation enabling the population’s involvement into decision-making processes. A constructive debate with and between all stakeholders must take place, as environment protection may not be guaranteed without citizens and the economy.

How do your country’s experience and stances benefit and/or contribute to a European policy on waste?

The German presidency of the first semester 2007 is our chance to try to achieve some progress in the difficult task of drafting a new version of the Waste Framework Directive. We are willing to draw lessons from successes but also from failures experienced by Germany. We are well aware that the situation in Germany may and shall not represent the only reference. Each country has its specificities and needs to conduct its own experiments but all mistakes should not be limited. A narrow cooperation, close contacts and intense discussions should enable us, in our common House Europe, to reach common goals and make the necessary efforts. And so we are committed, and I am personally committed, to using all our strengths.