PAN Europe has enjoined the European Commission to radically change its proposals on endocrine disruptors if it is to win the support of a qualified majority of member states, which are due to come to a decision in the next few weeks.
In mid-June, the Commission brought forward a raft of criteria to identify (and ultimately ban) chemical substances that adversely affect the hormonal system (endocrine disruptors) (see EUROPE 11573). For this, it took three criteria from the 2002 definition of the World Health Organisation (WHO) International Programme on Chemical Safety: (1) adverse effects on human health; (2) the endocrine mode of action; (3) a correlation between the two. A few weeks later, it agreed, under a welter of criticism, to amend its proposals in November in order to “clarify” certain provisions (see EUROPE 11632).
According to our information, the United Kingdom, Ireland and Slovenia support the Commission proposals as they stand. On the other hand, Sweden, France, Denmark and Belgium are calling for further guarantees to protect human health and the environment. Critical voices were raised at the Environment Council on 17 October (see EUROPE 11650).
PAN Europe, a network of non-governmental organisations opposed to harmful pesticides, says that Council discussions are having difficulty over three key issues. The first relates to the proposal to ban endocrine disruptors “known to cause adverse effects in humans” instead of the previous “may cause adverse effects”. PAN Europe believes 53% of the vote in the Council to be against this proposal and barely 25% for it. “This may lead to very little endocrine disrupting pesticides/biocides, if any, being removed from the market. Member states find that this change is a violation of the precautionary principle and feel that the Commission has no mandate to change existing rules”, the network says.
The second has to do with the exclusion of “presumed” endocrines from the WHO definition as 45% of member states are believed to be against this proposal. According to PAN Europe, “in the Commission’s Roadmap from 2013 presumed endocrines were included and several member states do not understand why this is changed”.
Lastly, the third difficulty is over the change from a “hazard”- based approach back to traditional “risk” assessment. This radical change “opposes the ‘hazard’ approach for endocrine disruptors that was agreed in co-decision of the pesticide regulation back in 2009”, says PAN Europe. “The Commission now has no choice but to radically change their draft in order to find a (qualified) majority among member states in the next meeting”, it argues. (Original version in French by Sophie Petitjean)