concludes that environmental improvements do not take place through announcements, but through concrete measures. Already in its exploratory opinion on the 7th Environment Action Programme (EAP), the EESC concluded that "the previous six Environment Action Programmes have not prevented many environmental problems in Europe from remaining unresolved. However, the reason for this is not the lack of knowledge about the causes of the problems or the lack of solutions, but the lack of political will to implement it".
proposes to underline the very marginal benefit in the Commission's proposal for an 8th Environment Action Programme. This marginal benefit lies in the announcement of an improved monitoring model and reporting. However, better governance alone does not require an "action programme".
criticises the Commission's proposal for merely taking the form of general situation descriptions and memoranda of understanding. Only already long-established objectives are identified and conditions for achieving the objectives are described, without, however, actually listing and deciding on instruments, actions, timetables or other measures that are deemed necessary in order to finally create the conditions for achieving the objectives or to achieve the objectives themselves.
calls for a fundamental debate on the usefulness of EAPs and reiterated his call for a separate "EU 2050 Sustainable Development Agenda".