Brussels, 01/06/2016 (Agence Europe) - Irked that the member states have failed on three occasions to give strong support for its successive proposals on renewing approval of glyphosate (first, for a period of 15 years, then for 10 and finally for 9 years with no restrictions on use) and short of time, the European Commission took the bull by the horns on Wednesday 1 June to make sure that this highly controversial weedkiller - the most widely used in Europe - does not have to be withdrawn from the market on 1 July.
Proposing this time an 18-month technical extension of the current EU licence held by the active substance in the weedkiller “RoundUp” by Monsanto, which would otherwise expire on 30 June, the Commission announced that it wanted to give the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) time to deliver its opinion on the potential dangers of this substance (see EUROPE 11562).
ECHA will assess whether it is carcinogenic - the WHO decided it probably is but the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) took the view that it probably is not. It will also consider the other possible toxic effects - such as mutagenicity, reproductive toxicity, and harm caused to aquatic organisms - that are covered by the European regulation on the classification and labelling of chemicals (Regulation 1272/2008). This assessment is expected to take between 12 and 18 months of work. It was Germany, the rapporteur member state, which took the initiative in March of submitting the matter to ECHA, which asked for further information that has since been provided. A 45-day public consultation will begin very shortly, in preparation for the formal ECHA opinion, which is expected in 18 months' time at the latest, an expert said.
The Commission is hoping that member state experts in the PAFF committee or the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed will come to qualified majority agreement on Monday of next week on this solution and will assume their responsibilities. European Health and Food Safety Commissioner Vytenis Andriukaitis was very clear on this as he informed the European press of this latest development after apprising the College of Commissioners.
Recommendations of restrictions of use. “We have asked the committee to vote on 6 June for a limited extension of the current approval until the ECHA opinion dispels the remaining doubts. We are also preparing a second decision on restrictions of use”, he said. This second decision will be in the form of simple recommendations to the member states on the ban on the toxic co-formulant COE tallowamine, the limitation of the use of glyphosate in parks and playgrounds and in the pre-harvest period in agriculture. It will be adopted after the PAFF committee approves the extension of the licence, the commissioner said.
“Under EU law, the last word belongs to the ECHA”, Andriukaitis said, too. Why, then, not decide right at the start to wait for the ECHA opinion, applying the precautionary principle?
“We have legal obligations. Food law is clear. We have always worked on the basis of the precautionary principle which applies when uncertainty occurs. But measures taken under the precautionary principle have to be temporary. We have a favourable scientific opinion from EFSA, from 27 member states and from the rapporteur country”, the commissioner replied to this question from EUROPE.
Ball in member states' court. Taking the view that “the European Commission has done everything it could to take account of member states' concerns and those of the European Parliament”, Andriukaitis stated on a number of occasions that “the ball is now in the member states' court”.
The commissioner says that the procedure in the EU for approval of plant health products under Regulation 1107/2009 is “the toughest in the world”. The procedure for glyphosate has lasted three years. Delivering a reminder that all the member states, with the exception of Sweden had accepted the conclusions of the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) and of EFSA that the active substance glyphosate was probably not carcinogenic, he called on the member states “not to hide behind the Commission”.
Either “yes” or withdrawal from the market. Once an active substance is approved or has had its approval renewed in the EU, member states are free to ban or restrict use of the final products - the weedkillers or pesticides themselves - within their own borders. That decision is for them to make, the commissioner pointed out.
However, “should there be no extension, member states would have to withdraw the authorisations for plant protection products containing glyphosate from their market”, he again made clear. The agricultural lobby, it is known, argued for a 15-year renewal of the authorisation (see EUROPE 11533).
In Parliament, MEP Bart Staes (Greens/EFA, Belgium) said that “the controversy over the re-authorisation has revitalised the debate on the European agricultural model. The opportunity must be seized to phase out glyphosate and other toxic weedkillers and pesticides and to re-direct the common agricultural policy towards a more sustainable model of agriculture”. He is pleased at what he describes as the Commission “backing down, after its failure to bulldoze through the re-approval of glyphosate following heavy industry lobbying”, and he adds that “this should be the beginning of the end”. Martin Haüsling (Greens/EFA, Germany) said that the Commission is acting reluctantly “under the pressure of public opinion”.
Others, however, such as Marc Tarabella (S&D, Belgium), see a ploy in this Commission proposal. “Officially the reason is to give the chemicals agency the time to come to a view on the dangers of this product. The intention is, in reality, very different: under the pretext of further analysis, they want de facto extension of the approval of glyphosate. It would be so much more sensible and safer to withdraw the products from the market until the new studies have been completed”, he stated.
The NGO Greenpeace sees this “technical extension” of the licence as another attempt by the Commission to get re-approval for glyphosate by the back door. “It's good to see that the Commission is no longer pushing for a final decision based on questionable safety assurances by the EU food safety agency. But whether the licence is for fifteen, nine or two years doesn't change anything in the real world. The same amount of glyphosate will be sprayed in parks, playgrounds and private gardens, and in our fields, vineyards and apple groves. Glyphosate levels in our bodies won't change either” said Franziska Achterberg, Greenpeace EU food policy director. She calls on the Commission to “take on board the concerns raised by independent scientists, the European Parliament and citizens - at the very least - applying strict restrictions to limit human exposure”. (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)