With its objection in Brussels on Thursday 19 October to the controversial proposal to renewal authorisation of glyphosate in the EU for a period of ten years, the European Parliament’s environment committee has called on the European Commission to do a complete U-turn.
The objection put down by Pavel Poc (S&D, Czech Republic), Kateřina Konečná (GUE/NGL, Czech Republic), Bas Eickhout (Greens/EFA, Netherlands) and Piernicola Pedicini (EFDD, Italy) and co-signed by Frédérique Ries (ALDE, Belgium), referee on this issue, was adopted by 39 votes to 9, with 10 abstentions).
MEPs argued reasons of public health, animal health and environmental protection and highlighted their concerns over the differing scientific risk assessments by the WHO and competent European agencies.
Total ban by end of 2020. Rather than sticking to its proposal as it stands (draft implementing regulation), the Commission should re-consider and propose a total ban on glyphosate by 15 December 2020, and with immediate measures, MEPs urge.
Immediate restrictions. The committee wants a ban from 15 December 2015 on household use of this total herbicide and for its use in farming to be similarly banned from 15 December when proven biological alternatives, such as integrated pest management systems, are available. The report published the previous day by Pan Europe (Pesticide Action Network – Europe) and the Greens/EFA Group sets out these existing alternative solutions (see EUROPE 11886).
The European Commission and member states are called on to propose appropriate transitional measures for the farming sector.
The environment committee calls for the risk assessments by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), which indicated that the active substance glyphosate was probably not a human carcinogen, to be made public in view of the public interest in this issue.
To back up their objection, MEPs note that the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) came to an altogether different conclusion, judging glyphosate to be probably carcinogenic in humans.
MEPs also highlight that the revelations contained in the Monsanto Papers have shed doubt on the credibility of some studies used in the EU evaluation on glyphosate safety (see EUROPE 11881).
The committee says that the EU’s authorisation procedure, including the scientific evaluation of substances, should be based solely on published, peer-reviewed and independent studies commissioned by competent public authorities. It calls for EU agencies to be beefed up in order to allow them to work in this way. These agencies currently do not have the financial and other resources necessary to be able to conduct studies themselves.
The European Parliament will to vote on the resolution in Strasbourg on 24 October. If the vote mirrors that of the environment committee it will bring pressure to bear on the member states on the eve of the vote by experts on the standing committee on plants, animals, food and feed (PAFF). (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)