Campaigners worried about the negative impacts of a cruise terminal at Enderby Wharf were handed a potential lifeline after the European Commission confirmed they would be investigating the case.

The international cruise liner terminal plans were approved by Greenwich Council in 2015 and cleared the High Court last year after a campaign against the terminal.

As well as the cruise terminal itself, which will see massive cruise liners moored in the Thames, the plans include 477 homes in housing blocks ranging from 23 to 32 storeys, a skills academy, restaurants and retail units.

Now the petition is moving even higher to the European Parliament as the East Greenwich Residents Association have successfully petitioned the EU to look into the case.

On their Crowd Justice petition page, a spokesperson said: “We have been informed that our petition to the European Parliament has been deemed “admissible”.

“It is now being investigated by the European Commission and has been also referred to the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety.”

The primary fears of campaigners are over the pollution massive cruise liners would bring into Greenwich and London, using the negative impact cruises have had on the Italian city of Venice as an example.

Campaigners in Venice have gone so far as to block cruise ships from entering the canal, with their primary complaints being that cruises damage the local environment, spoil the character of the city and pricing locals out of homes.

Greenwich Council has always maintained that cruise liners would bring a lot of money into the borough through tourism and extra jobs.

Dan Garrun, of Greenwich Green Party, explained how large ships docking in Greenwich doesn’t necessarily mean a boon for locals.

He said: “You get a lot of people who come here to dock and not spending any money here and they are eating on the boat.

“Not a lot of money goes into the local economy and creates a lot of big problems for the area.

“People on cruise liners might only go see one or two things. They might just be coming up to the observatory or the market and not anywhere else.

“During the Olympics people through we would get lots of money in Greenwich market but people were just spending money in a very specific areas.

“When you see the kind of money that is in the cruise industry and how much of that goes into the local community you can see why people might be against it.”

Pollution is the biggest fear of many of the people opposing the project, including Greenwich and Woolwich MP Matthew Pennycook who has been pressing for a cleaner, greener cruise tunnel.

Greenwich Council though has stated that on-shore power is simply unfeasible.

Speaking at a meeting of the council, Cllr Danny Thorpe, cabinet member for regeneration and sustainability, said that on-shore power was explored as a possibility but was ruled out for reasons such as cost.

He said: “Very few cruise ships globally have the ability to link up to shore power, the power requirements vary with ship size and the electrical requirements are not compatible with the UK national grid supply.

“The feasibility of providing on shore power was verified by independent experts on behalf of the Council who concluded that with the new low sulphur requirements now governing the supply and use of heavy diesel fuel for marine vessels it is unlikely that the huge investment in shore side power equipment can be justified.”

Now all that stands in the way of Enderby Wharf plans could be the EU and their laws on pollution.

Mr Garrun said: “While we are still in the EU we could still say we are covered by EU pollution laws.

“We are not saying cancel it completely, there is a good way to do it. People aren’t completely against it.

“There are places in the world that have built very green terminal locations for cruises. People could be behind it if it was done properly.”