The European Parliament is pushing for stricter, EU-wide deadlines and automatic approvals for energy infrastructure permits, setting up a confrontation with member states that want to keep national flexibility. The clash is detailed in an internal document seen by Euronews, as negotiators prepare for talks on new permitting rules.
The proposed rules aim to cut approval times that can stretch to a decade, slowing renewable energy projects, grid upgrades, storage facilities, and other infrastructure critical to the bloc's energy transition. The Parliament's position is notably more rigid than the European Commission's original proposal or the Council's negotiating mandate, especially for electricity grids.
While the Commission suggested a maximum two-year authorisation period for transmission and distribution infrastructure, the Parliament wants distribution projects approved within one year and transmission projects within two years. The Council would keep a two-year ceiling for both, with possible extensions in extraordinary circumstances.
Automatic approvals: the core dispute
The sharper disagreement concerns what happens when authorities miss those deadlines. The Parliament backs a stronger use of tacit approval, meaning certain administrative steps are considered approved if officials fail to respond on time. The Council has narrowed this approach, allowing member states to apply tacit approval only to specific intermediary steps, while excluding environmental decisions and grid-connection permits.
Danish MEP Niels Fuglsang (S&D), who leads the file in Parliament, said faster grid construction is essential if the EU is serious about its climate goals and about lowering electricity and fuel bills. "The European Parliament's position delivers faster permitting without compromising legal certainty or public confidence," Fuglsang told Euronews. "I will defend that approach in the negotiations, and I don't think weakening the rules on tacit approval is the right solution."
The two institutions also differ on how far energy projects should be prioritised when they conflict with other interests. Both sides support tighter deadlines, digitalisation, and simpler procedures, but they diverge on how much discretion national authorities should retain.
The Parliament's mandate seeks to broaden the presumption that renewable energy projects and related infrastructure are of overriding public interest, limiting member states' ability to create exceptions. The Council, however, keeps the broader presumption but allows more explicit exceptions—for example, where cultural heritage needs protection or where a project would have significant environmental effects that cannot be mitigated or compensated.
On administrative structure, the Parliament wants a more standardised system, including stronger requirements for a single point of contact for project developers. The Council is more willing to let governments decide how to combine existing national authorities and contact points.
In some areas, the Council goes further than the Commission. According to the document, the Council's mandate raises the threshold for simplified permitting of small-scale installations, including small solar systems, to 200 kW, up from the Commission's 100 kW level.
The emerging compromise is not just about faster versus slower permitting; it is about who controls the clock. The Parliament wants EU rules to make missed deadlines costly and approvals more predictable, while governments want to accelerate projects without giving Brussels—or an automatic approval mechanism—too much power over national permitting decisions.
This debate comes as the EU faces pressure to accelerate its energy transition, with auditors recently finding that the bloc's energy independence plan stumbles on grids and funding. The outcome of these negotiations will determine how quickly Europe can build the infrastructure needed for a cleaner energy system, and whether the single market can function smoothly across the 27 member states.
