Government issues plan to cut red tape in environmental licensing, help business
Proposals include expanding right of businesses to appeal; advocacy group urges, ‘Don’t let bureaucratic simplification water down environmental demands’
Sue Surkes is The Times of Israel's environment reporter
A memorandum setting out a planned reform in the way environmental permits are given to businesses was issued for 21 days of public comment on Sunday by the Finance Ministry and the Environmental Protection Ministry.
The government aims to cut bureaucratic red tape by combining several permits into one single one that is valid for seven to ten years, in line with European practice.
Among other things, the legislation calls for anchoring the principles of European regulatory legislation into Israeli law, combining the main permits into one long-term one, cutting waiting times, and creating a digital one-stop-shop through which all permit-related dealings will be conducted.
The bill also promises “substantial additions” to the licensing staff at the Environmental Protection Ministry.
One key departure from the current Israeli norm is that businesses will be able to appeal to the Environmental Protection Ministry. At present, the right to appeal exists only in the case of business licenses. Under the new proposals, this will be extended to permits for air pollution and the use of hazardous substances.
According to the plan, businesses will be able to appeal if they can prove the existence of one of four conditions: a significant gap between the cost of complying with the permit conditions and the expected environmental benefit; inability to meet the time frame for implementing the conditions; inconsistency between the conditions set out in the permit and EU custom; or a significant difference in the conditions that the permit holder has been ordered to meet, compared to those of another permit holder in similar circumstances.
Infrastructure companies in the fields of rail and air transportation, ports, power stations, desalination, and fuel storage and transportation will be able to appeal “where permit conditions may harm a significant public interest in quality or service to the public or economy or raise the cost of living in this sector.”
A joint statement issued by the two ministries said that the reform will bring Israeli practice into line with European standards, cut the wait for permits by more than 400 hours per year, and save NIS 500 million ($157 million) in direct costs and a further NIS 2 billion to NIS 3 billion ($630 to $940 million) in indirect ones. It would also save companies NIS 85 million (more than $25 million) annually on permit-related bureaucracy.
The savings would reduce the annual outlay of an estimated NIS 3.7 billion ($1.16 billion) that the manufacturing and electrical industries currently spend on environmental protection each year, a sum that is 11 percent higher, as a percentage of GDP, than in Europe and 15% to 23% higher than among OECD countries, the statement said.
At present, limits on air pollution, hazardous materials, and discharging at sea, for example, are imposed within the framework of three different permits, while treatment of waste forms part of a business permit. The permits are provided in different offices and are valid for different periods.
When Israel joined the OECD in 2010, it committed to adopting the principles and standards of environmental regulation common in Europe, which include the issuing of single permits covering a variety of issues.
Moves to reform Israel’s environmental licensing failed to advance in 2015.
The current version, which follows an August 2021 government decision to move ahead with such a reform, seeks to amend existing legislation, such as the Clean Air Act, rather than create a new law.
The two ministries hope to bring the proposals to the Constitution Law and Justice Committee in March.
Dr. Arye Vanger of the environmental advocacy organization Adam Teva V’Din welcomed the steps toward a unified permit to reduce red tape but said it was critical to ensure that bureaucratic simplification did not lead to watered-down environmental requirements.
Urging transparency, he warned that if too many issues were left open to negotiation with companies, the result could be more, not less, pollution.
