Brussels 08/03/2016 (Agence Europe) - No decision ended up being made in Brussels on Tuesday 8 March regarding the renewal of the authorisation to market the highly controversial glyphosate, the active chemical substance used in herbicides such as Monsanto's Round Up, in the EU.
Against the backdrop of the scientific row raging between EFSA and the WHO as to whether this active substance has carcinogenic properties, the experts of the member states decided, after two days of meetings, not to vote on the European Commission's plans to renew the authorisation licence for glyphosate until 2031. This postponement was decided upon to the great delight of all those opposed to the project - representatives of the scientific community, members of the European Parliament, NGOs and citizens (see EUROPE 11506).
Meeting at the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed (PAFF), the experts of the Twenty-Eight and of the Commission (head of Pesticide unit of DG Health) manage to agree on one thing: to give themselves time to reflect in order to reach a consensus.
Discussions, therefore, will continue. All decisions have been deferred, possibly until the next meeting of the PAFF committee to focus on pesticides, on 18 and 19 May, or possibly sooner, at another meeting the date for which has not yet been set. However, there is no immediate hurry as “the deadline for a theoretical renewal is the end of June”, the Commission's services noted on Tuesday. That is when the licence for the use of glyphosate in the EU expires.
The member states were divided over whether to grant a 15-year renewal for this product, which was classified in March 2015 as probably carcinogenic to humans by the WTO, whilst EFSA concluded in November that it was probably not.
On the first day of the meeting, the United Kingdom, which is in favour of a renewal of the authorisation (as is Belgium), is reported to have wanted the member states to go ahead with their vote, but a number of delegations, such as Italy and the Netherlands, called it to be postponed.
Italy, France, the Netherlands and Sweden opposed the renewal of the licence. Germany will opt to abstain. “With Netherlands, Sweden, France and Italy against (…), Germany has the swing vote. Abstention is enough”, the MEP Bas Eickhout (Greens/EFA, Netherlands), who is delighted at the postponement, predicted on Twitter.
If it takes place, the vote will be by qualified majority. If the experts fail to achieve a qualified majority for or against the Commission's proposal, a committee of appeal will be convened, which will also have to take position by qualified majority. If it also fails to do so, the Commission will be authorised to make the decision itself.
“The Commission wants a clear majority for or against to avoid the member states hiding behind the Commission, as is the case with GMOs”, Enrico Brivio, spokesperson to the Commissioner for Health and Food Safety, Vytenis Andriukaitis, told EUROPE.
The MEP Marc Tarabella (S&D, Belgium), said that “the European Commission is itself hiding behind an EFSA opinion which contradicts all other studies, including that of the WHO”. Arguing that “the principle of precaution must prevail”, he expressed his regret at the fact that his country, Belgium, is in the camp which “supports the position of the Commission and Monsanto”.
Greenpeace, which is fighting against the renewal of the licence, points out that in the wake of the opinion published by the WHO, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) is soon to be carrying out studies into the broader effects to health of glyphosate and that its work will not conclude until the end of 2017. “Rushing to grant a new licence now, without waiting for an evaluation by Europe's chemical agency, would be like skydiving without checking your equipment first. As long as there is conflicting scientific advice, glyphosate should not be approved for use in the EU”, said Franziska Achterberg, EU food policy expert for Greenpeace.
The idea put forward by the Commissioner to reduce the licence renewal period to ten years was not discussed. “This is a political gesture, but the member states would not hear of it”, said the spokesperson to Commissioner Andriukaitis. On the other hand, a consensus was reached on the idea of drawing up a European list of co-formulants that the member states wish to ban on their territory, so that the member states are kept abreast of the risks related to these additives.
The assessment of the WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) examined glyphosate and its co-formulants. The EFSA opinion, on the other hand, concerns only the active substance of glyphosate. Active substances are authorised at European level. The member states then grant the authorisation to market the end product (active substance plus co-formulants) sold to consumers. In the case of glyphosate, the Commission is proposing an exceptional ban on tallow amine, a co-formulant known to be toxic. (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)