The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) risk assessment committee will continue the discussion on Wednesday 15 March on the classification of glyphosate in terms of its toxicity, the ECHA announced on Wednesday 8 March.
The previous day, the ECHA publicly refuted the possibility that the links between some experts on its risk assessment committee (RAC) and the industry were in any way a threat to impartiality and denied any conflicts of interest that may have a prejudicial effect on the opinion it is due to provide at the request of the European Commission.
The arguments were advanced by ECHA Executive Director Geert Dancet in his response to the concerns expressed by Greenpeace and a group of environmental, health and transparency NGOs in an open letter on 7 March (see EUROPE 11740).
“Regarding your concern about ECHA employing staff from industry, as a matter of principle, we do not exclude potential staff members with a background in industry or any other stakeholder organisation. We believe that practical experience from all aspects of our work adds to our understanding, effectiveness and efficiency. But clearly, any potential conflicts of interest need to be managed and this is why we have in place a policy on conflicts of interest which ensures that potential conflicts are identified and managed appropriately”, states Dancet.
He gives assurances that RAC chair Tim Bowmer had “made a clean break with his previous employer” on joining the ECHA in 2012 and says he is “confident that the two members concerned have not breached (ECHA) rules”. He adds: “The chair and two members have not declared an interest in the substance (glyphosate) and we believe this to be correct”.
The NGO’s letter can be found at: http://www.greenpeace.org/eu-unit/Global/eu-unit/reports-briefings/2017/20170306_Open_Letter_ECHA_CoI_Concerns.pdf And the response from ECHA at: https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/22931011/glyphosate_greenpeace_ed_reply.pdf/2e391d0b-43d8-05b3-5a31-4bd8f0eea298 (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)