Five questions about our poor water quality and the consequences

For the EU member states, this theme is more urgent than ever. In 2027, the Water Framework Directive (WFD) objective will come into effect, which stipulates that surface water and groundwater must be 'chemically clean and ecologically healthy'. For the Netherlands, this means that there is (a lot of) work to be done. The quality of our water is the worst of all member states. And that can have major consequences for the business community. How is that possible, for a country that lives with water like no other? Five questions for Skip van Duren, PwC lawyer and expert on the water dossier.

1. World Water Week has been drawing attention to the problems with water worldwide since 1991. The Water Framework Directive (WFD) came into force in 2000. Yet the Netherlands is the worst in the European class. How come?

‘That is quite a complicated question, which cannot be traced back to one specific cause. A logical explanation could be found in the circumstance that the WFD has a long phase-in period until 2027, which means that compliance with the requirements has been postponed by policymakers for years – for example for economic reasons. For example, provinces and municipalities have not included WFD objectives in their permit granting. As a result, no sense of urgency has been created among the business community to comply with the WFD.’

‘Another possible explanation lies in how the regulations were designed. In short, the WFD includes a list of maximum values ​​of pollutants that may not be exceeded. This is a cumulative list. In other words: if too high a concentration of one pollutant is found in the water but the threshold value for the other pollutants is not exceeded, the water is considered polluted, while in that case the same water does meet the requirements of the WFD for 99 per cent.’

2. Will water quality become the new nitrogen dossier?

‘If the Netherlands does not meet the deadline in 2027, it could lead to delays or standstills in business activities due to legal procedures. Just as was the case after the nitrogen targets of the European Habitats Directive were not met, part of the Netherlands could be closed off to business activities, which is very reminiscent of the nitrogen dossier. An important difference is that the effects of projects or activities on water quality are more local in nature than with nitrogen. A project in a specific area can have direct consequences for the water quality in that specific area, without necessarily having consequences for other areas.’

3. You could call the Netherlands a ‘drain’ of Europe, a lot of water ends up in our delta. Isn’t it unfair that we pay the bill for this?

‘You could indeed say that the Netherlands, due to its low location by the sea, is the “drain” of Europe. For example, a lot of polluted water flows into the Netherlands via the rivers. I find it difficult to estimate whether this is unfair. I have not seen any studies that map out which part of the problem we have in the Netherlands is caused by polluted water from abroad. In other words, we must be careful not to hide behind the “drain argument”. For example, the Netherlands also has a large agricultural sector and (chemical) industry sector, which also contribute.’

4. The business community is also dependent on measures taken by the government. Should the business community exert pressure?

‘From a legal perspective, the responsibility lies primarily with the Dutch government. In addition to this legal reality, there is the perspective of socially responsible entrepreneurship. From that perspective, I would like to encourage companies to work with the government, in a constructive and proactive manner, to come up with concrete plans to improve water quality as quickly as possible. Sooner or later, these companies will have to comply with the regulations. And, even more importantly, ultimately everyone – including companies – has an interest in a healthy environment and a clean earth. In my opinion, the WFD therefore reveals that the business climate (as opposed to just the business climate) is becoming increasingly important. In other words, the climate to innovate, invest and grow within the earth's carrying capacity.’

5. The Netherlands has just over a year left to comply with the WFD. Is that mission impossible? What would you advise companies to do now?

'I don't like to think in terms of impossibilities, but meeting the 2027 deadline will be a Herculean task. I would advise companies to start inventorying the impact that the WFD has on their business operations as soon as possible, in order to anticipate (possible enforcement of) government regulations. Consider, for example, the following:

• Does your company discharge one or more chemical substances and does your company have an up-to-date overview of all discharges and emissions of pollutants into surface water and gundwater?
• Does your company have insight into the amount of groundwater and surface water that it extracts for its business processes, and do these extractions meet the sustainability criteria and permit requirements as set out in the WFD and related guidelines?
• Does your company have a plan for cases in which, for example, reassessment of permits reveals that activities are in conflict with the WFD standards?
  

After such an “impact assessment”, it can be assessed what risks there are and how these risks can be limited by strategic course changes, in order to be prepared for any new policy and/or legal procedures. PwC has a broad team of multidisciplinary advisors to help with this.’