A year ago, Surfrider Foundation Europe warned about the sweeping wave of EU law-stripping, a trend that was becoming increasingly clear, to the detriment of environmental protection and public health.
Today, the verdict is unambiguous: this large-scale deregulation policy, presented as a necessary “simplification” to boost business competitiveness, has accelerated at an alarming pace.
At a time when the European Union should be a bulwark against the climate crisis and pollution, it appears to have made a choice: environmental regulations are being framed as a barrier to competitiveness, a “problem” to be solved. Yet these laws are far from superfluous constraints. They exist to protect what is essential to us: a healthy environment, preserved ecosystems, and a livable planet for future generations.
Put forward in the form of so-called “omnibus” bills, the Commission’s law-stripping agenda will have very real and lasting consequences for the climate, water quality, soil pollution, the presence of toxic substances in our everyday lives, and our health.
What is an "omnibus" and why should it worry us?
The magic omnibus — In EU legislation, an “omnibus” law refers to a directive or regulation that bundles together proposals to amend several existing pieces of legislation into a single act. This means texts that have already been adopted and implemented, sometimes after years of negotiation and compromise, can be reopened and amended en bloc, bypassing the usual legislative procedures. What is particularly worrying is that the laws targeted by these various omnibus packages are, for the most part, laws designed to protect human health, fundamental rights and the environment, to hold companies and multinationals accountable for their environmental impact, or to govern the energy transition.
From the Green Deal to “simplification” — While Ursula von der Leyen’s first term (2019–2024) as President of the European Commission was marked by the rollout of the Green Deal, the June 2024 elections, which saw gains for right-wing and far-right parties, brought an abrupt end to that period of environmental progress. Economic competitiveness was very quickly placed well above environmental or public health concerns.
An official report used to justify the law-stripping — The publication of the Draghi report in September 2024 provided further justification for legitimising the vast “simplification” drive the EU subsequently embarked on: Europe must assert itself against other major world powers, strengthen its autonomy, and, to do so, shed whatever holds back its competitiveness. Following this report, environmental and social regulations, which currently require industries to limit their impact on climate, biodiversity or health, quickly became the primary targets of an accelerated dismantling policy.
When lobbies pull the strings (again) — As is so often the case when environmental and social regulations come under attack, today’s deregulation drive did not emerge out of nowhere: it is being driven above all by multinationals and industrial lobbies, granted access at the highest level, both nationally and at EU level, to press their interests. Environmental and public health NGOs, meanwhile, no longer enjoy the same access or the same level of attention from EU institutions under this mandate.
A rushed unravelling — Even though it is a legal requirement, discussions on the laws reopened under these omnibus packages have often taken place without any genuine consultation of civil society.
What’s more, many of the texts being challenged appear to be revised without serious prior impact assessments, without a rigorous evaluation of the real consequences for businesses, citizens and the environment, or through procedures so accelerated that they make any in-depth scrutiny impossible. None of this adds up.
A fundamentally undemocratic process — The European Ombudsman herself has acknowledged procedural shortcomings in how these reforms have been conducted, a finding of maladministration that speaks volumes: these omnibus packages are a means of limiting public and parliamentary debate, of bypassing checks and balances, and of advancing short-term economic and political interests at the expense of the common good.
If deregulation is today’s dominant policy trend, we, as citizens, have a role to play.
Our European leaders must not give in to polluters and vested interests. Let’s demand that they defend the laws that protect us, and all living things!
Every signature counts: Sign the Hands Off Nature petition and add your weight to this demand.
Which omnibus packages are most concerning for ocean protection?
Since 2025, the European Commission has already launched more than 10 omnibus proposals, and there are more to come. Four of them are of particular concern to us.
Omnibus I — Green Deal and sustainable finance
The Green Deal in the crosshairs — This omnibus strikes directly at the heart of the Green Deal and the sustainable finance package, targeting four major pieces of legislation in particular:
- the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), which requires companies to report on their environmental, social and governance impacts;
- the EU Taxonomy Regulation, which sets clear criteria for identifying genuinely sustainable economic activities;
- the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD/CS3D), which requires companies to identify and prevent the negative impacts of their activities on human rights and the environment throughout their value chain;
- and lastly the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), which introduces a “carbon tax” on certain products imported into Europe.
What worries us — In France, corporate due diligence obligations already exist, and they have allowed us to formally notify nine retailers for failing to meet their obligations regarding plastic use. Seeing this mechanism weakened at EU level means losing a major opportunity to extend it more widely, and risking its disappearance at national level too. More broadly, this group of texts represented one of the most advanced pieces of environmental legislation in the world. Unravelling them means abandoning the leadership position Europe has held until now; it means giving up on holding companies accountable and requiring them to bear the environmental costs of their activities, among other things.
Omnibus VI — Chemicals
From flexibility to deregulation, it’s a small step — Published on 9 July 2025, Omnibus VI proposed by the Commission aimed to bring more flexibility to chemicals regulation (specifically rules on the classification, packaging and labelling of chemical products, cosmetics and fertilisers). In reality, the proposals put forward mainly reduce protections against hazardous chemical substances:
- relaxed labelling requirements for hazardous chemicals,
- extended authorisation for carcinogenic substances in cosmetics,
- lighter registration requirements for fertilisers,
- a revision of sustainable taxonomy rules (raising the risk that certain toxic products could be labelled “green”).
The chemical industry in the driving seat — This omnibus is the result of sustained dialogue, indeed, a particularly close relationship, with the chemical industry: numerous meetings have taken place in recent years between Commission representatives (including the President of the Commission herself!) and chemical industry lobbies. These exchanges led to the publication of the Antwerp Declaration (orchestrated by CEFIC, the main representative body for the chemical industry in Brussels), which heavily influenced the Commission’s work programme, as well as its “Clean” Industrial Deal.
We’re not letting this go — To date, while the text has dropped the exclusion of certain CMR substances (carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic for reproduction) from the default ban in cases of exposure by inhalation or ingestion, it still contains numerous proposals that are of serious concern to civil society.
The Council approved the agreement on 26 June, followed by the European Parliament’s Environment Committee on 14 July.
The plenary vote is expected the week of 19 October. We remain fully mobilised to follow this closely.
Omnibus VIII — Environmental legislation
Removing the safeguards, one by one — Under the guise of reducing administrative burdens for businesses, this omnibus targets the directives governing industrial environmental obligations.
On the agenda: a rollback of environmental permitting requirements, a fast-track process for industrial projects, relaxed obligations on industrial emissions, and longer deadlines for companies to come into compliance.
What worries us — What these “simplifications” mean in practice is less rigour in environmental assessments, less transparency in impact monitoring, ultimately less environmental democracy, and, over time, increased pressure on ecosystems.
By lifting the safeguards that protect the environment, we open the door to an increase in industrial pollution, while heightening uncertainty around public health. This is not a mere “simplification”, it is a deliberate weakening of the safeguards that protect the ocean and the planet as a whole.
Omnibus X — Food safety and pesticides
Overturning a golden rule — Until now, no pesticide could be authorised for life in Europe. Every product had to be reassessed by science every ten to fifteen years, in light of the latest scientific knowledge, and then either confirmed or withdrawn from the market. This mechanism has enabled the ban of several dangerous products in recent years.
In its Omnibus X on “food safety and food”, proposed in December 2025, the Commission rolls back precisely this key point: instead of periodically reassessing substances placed on the EU market, the Commission plans to periodically draw up a list of substances subject to doubt, in order to check whether they still meet the approval criteria justifying their continued presence on the market.
This new proposal could allow certain harmful pesticides to remain on the market, under the pretext of reducing the burden on health agencies, speeding up processes and cutting costs.
Human and environmental health seriously at risk — The proposals set out in Omnibus X don’t stop there, and the threats they pose are genuinely worrying, including the relaxation of rules on aerial spraying of pesticides by drone (near residential areas), the extension of grace periods following the ban of a chemical substance, and the broadening of exemptions granted to substances that do not meet approval criteria.
To date, the European Parliament and the Council have yet to take an official position on the Omnibus X package. They therefore still have the opportunity to reverse the direction set by the Commission and to place the protection of human health and the environment above economic interests.
What worries us — What emerges from the full set of measures on the table is that potentially carcinogenic products, endocrine disruptors or “forever chemicals” could remain on the market for much longer, without new scientific data being able to justify their withdrawal. This is a disaster for human health, but also for the ocean: these substances, which run off into groundwater and waterways before reaching the sea, have devastating impacts on ecosystems, both terrestrial and aquatic.
Even when a piece of deregulation doesn’t directly affect ocean-related legislation, it always ends up reaching the ocean eventually. And once again, this reform has been pushed through under an accelerated procedure, without examining the alternatives available for improving the implementation of existing regulations.
Behind the omnibus packages, a far broader dismantling effort
The omnibus packages are only the tip of the iceberg. Beyond these “legislative packages”, an entire deregulation agenda is unfolding behind the scenes: texts being amended outside any omnibus procedure, ambitions being scaled back, and exchanges with NGOs and civil society becoming increasingly difficult.
The watchword is the same everywhere: simplify, and do away with constraints.
In this climate, it’s a safe bet that other key environmental texts will also be hollowed out.
The Water Framework Directive in the mining lobby’s sights — Alongside the publication of Omnibus VIII, the Commission presented the RESourceEU action plan, aimed at “accelerating and scaling up” the EU’s supply of critical raw materials.
This plan raises a risk to the protection of aquatic environments, given that the European executive has announced its intention to “review and revise” the Water Framework Directive (WFD), giving in to pressure from the mining lobby, which has been calling for additional exemptions for several months.
It is worth noting that the mining industry is one of the sectors most responsible for water pollution, particularly through the release of heavy metals in mining effluents. This announcement concerning the WFD is, above all, a political decision, made without any prior assessment or consultation. This approach has been widely condemned by Surfrider and numerous other organisations.
On 8 September, we filed an official complaint with the European Ombudsman, alleging maladministration by the European Commission over its decision to revise the WFD.
The Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (UWWTD) undermined by the pharmaceutical and cosmetics lobbies — In force since 1 January 2025, the revised UWWTD introduced, among other advances, a new stage of water treatment at wastewater treatment plants, designed to target micropollutants.
To cover the costs associated with this new treatment stage, and to ensure a fairer and more effective framework for reducing pollution in line with the polluter-pays principle, an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme was also introduced.
Fiercely criticised and attacked by the pharmaceutical and cosmetics sectors, this scheme is now under threat and jeopardises the integrity of the Directive as a whole: last June, under pressure from industrial lobbies, MEPs voted in favour of suspending key provisions of the EPR scheme until a new impact study is carried out.
This is a way for industry players to call environmental legislation back into question, even as the EU drifts further away from its water resilience objectives.
NGOs are sounding the alarm
This wave of deregulation reminds us of a truth we would sometimes rather forget: environmental and social progress is never permanently secured. It can be swept away in a handful of high-level discussions, if no one is watching.
And that is precisely why we keep fighting.
Carrying the ocean’s voice… and not letting go — As an NGO working to protect the ocean, we drafted, alongside numerous other NGOs, an opinion last September as part of the European Commission’s public consultation on legislative simplification, which can be read here.
The message is clear: simplification cannot come at the expense of environmental and public health protection.
And because it’s often difficult to move forward alone, especially when facing powerful industrial lobbies, we work in coalition with numerous other NGOs to make the voice of the ocean and aquatic ecosystems heard collectively. Together, we carry far more weight against industrial lobbies and EU institutions.
Our volunteers, our eyes on the ground — Resistance is not only played out in the corridors of EU institutions. Our volunteers are our eyes and ears on the ground: they alert us to new pollution incidents, to whether or not existing regulations are being respected, and to what the official figures don’t always show. This link between fieldwork and advocacy is at the heart of what we do.
Informing is also a form of resistance — Communicating about what is happening, as we are doing in this article, is an integral part of our role. Organisations like Surfrider contribute indirectly to citizens’ right to information, even though they cannot substitute themselves for state action. On major issues, they can also refer matters to the National Commission for Public Debate, as is currently the case regarding the Winter Olympic Games in France.
If deregulation is today’s dominant policy trend, we, as citizens, have a role to play.
Because we cannot allow the environmental laws that govern the quality of the water we swim in, that aim to reduce the amount of plastic ending up in our seas and in our bodies, or that protect our coastlines from the impacts of climate change, to be dismantled piece by piece.
Because we cannot let polluting industries and politicians sacrifice our living environment and the ecosystems that sustain us. Because nature and our health are not for sale.
Our European leaders must not give in to polluters and vested interests. Let’s demand that they defend the laws that protect us, and all living things!
Every signature counts: Sign the Hands Off Nature petition and add your weight to this demand.