On the implementation of the urban wastewater treatment directive (UWWTD) and risks to the security of supply of medicines

B100243/2026

European Parliament resolution on the implementation of the urban wastewater treatment directive (UWWTD) and risks to the security of supply of medicines

(2026/2652(RSP))

The European Parliament,

– having regard to Articles 168 and 191 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

– having regard to Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment and its revision, Directive (EU) 2024/3019 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 concerning urban wastewater treatment (recast),

– having regard to the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality,

– having regard to the role of the Member States in protecting public health and the environment,

– having regard to the shared competences of the European Parliament’s Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety and the Committee on Public Health,

– having regard to the question to the Commission on the implementation of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive and risks to the security of supply of medicines (O-000013/2026 – B10-0008/2026),

– having regard to Rules 142(5) and 136(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A. whereas effective treatment of urban wastewater is essential for the protection of human health, water quality and ecosystems;

B. whereas Member States face differing geographical, climatic and infrastructural conditions that have a significant impact on their wastewater management systems;

C. whereas excessive regulatory burdens at EU level can increase costs for households and place disproportionate pressure on municipalities;

D. whereas access to affordable water services is a central component of public health protection;

E. whereas proposals to introduce extended producer responsibility schemes, including for the pharmaceutical sector, risk distorting healthcare systems and increasing costs for patients; whereas, in practice, such schemes are likely to shift costs to healthcare systems, patients and consumers rather than to producers;

F. whereas, pursuant to Article 168(7) TFEU, the organisation and delivery of health services and medical care are the responsibility of the Member States, including decisions affecting the financing, pricing and availability of medicinal products;

G. whereas uniform regulatory approaches at EU level risk disregarding local and regional knowledge, leading to inefficient allocation of resources and suboptimal infrastructure investment;

H. whereas price distortions in the pharmaceutical market, including for generic medicines, may weaken competition, reduce security of supply and increase long-term healthcare costs;

I. whereas the principle of proportionality requires that regulatory measures do not exceed what is necessary to achieve environmental objectives and that their economic and social consequences be taken into account;

1. Reaffirms that water policy and urban wastewater management must respect the competences of the Member States; recalls that, while EU action in the field of environmental protection may in principle be justified, Article 168(7) TFEU requires that such action must not encroach upon Member States’ responsibilities, in particular as regards the organisation, financing and cost structures of their healthcare systems, including indirectly through rules affecting the availability and affordability of medicinal products, and that any EU action must remain strictly limited by the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality;

2. Emphasises that any revision of EU rules must allow for maximum flexibility in implementation, taking account of national and local circumstances;

3. Stresses that environmental objectives must be pursued in a manner that ensures the affordability of water services and avoids excessive costs for households; warns that cost-shifting mechanisms that obscure the true origin of costs undermine efficient price signals, weaken cost transparency for consumers and public authorities, and lead to a misallocation of resources;

4. Warns against imposing uniform EU-wide requirements that fail to take account of regional diversity and differences in infrastructure and thereby reduce the efficiency of resource allocation and long-term investment decisions;

5. Emphasises that local and regional authorities are best placed to assess infrastructure needs and suitable technological solutions, and that centralised regulatory prescriptions risk disregarding context-specific knowledge and increasing inefficiencies;

6. Rejects extended producer responsibility for medicinal products; notes that such schemes may in practice function as de facto levies on essential healthcare products, distort competition and ultimately increase costs for patients and public healthcare systems;

7. Calls for generic medicines to be exempted from such rules, in recognition of their crucial role in ensuring competition, cost containment and security of supply in healthcare systems;

8. Emphasises that the pharmaceutical industry should not be subject to sector-wide extended producer responsibility in the absence of a direct and demonstrable causal link to pollution, and that any targeted obligation must remain proportionate and must not undermine the availability, affordability or competitive functioning of the medicines market;

9. Warns that extended producer responsibility schemes introduced at EU level may in practice operate as hidden cost-shifting mechanisms, since costs imposed on producers are likely to be passed on to consumers through higher prices for essential goods and services; stresses that such increases may bypass national budgetary scrutiny and disproportionately affect low-income households;

10. Emphasises that the costs of urban wastewater treatment should, where necessary, be addressed through transparent and democratically accountable public financing mechanisms at Member State level, rather than through indirect regulatory cost-shifting at EU level that obscures who ultimately bears the burden;

11. Calls on the Commission to revise its proposal for a directive on the treatment of urban wastewater so as to remove extended producer responsibility provisions for medicinal products; considers that, where such provisions are maintained for other sectors, they must remain strictly limited, proportionate and cost-effective, fully respect the competences of the Member States, and avoid creating indirect cost burdens for consumers;

12. Emphasises the importance of investment in infrastructure and innovation, while stressing that Member States must retain the possibility to determine the most suitable technological solutions themselves; notes that innovation is best fostered through flexible, decentralised decision-making rather than prescriptive regulatory frameworks;

13. Opposes any further centralisation of water policy and calls for decision-making to remain as close as possible to citizens, with a strengthened role for local and regional authorities, in line with Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union;

14. Calls on the Commission to assess systematically the full economic impact of any proposed rules on urban wastewater, including cumulative compliance costs, before introducing new obligations;

15. Calls on the Commission to act as a supporting and coordinating body, strictly within the limits of the Treaties and without extending its role into areas reserved for the Member States;

16. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.