Although rather warmly welcomed by the big political groups at the European Parliament, the first draft of the recommendations of the European Parliament’s special PEST committee will be extensively amended.
This is the conclusion drawn by Éric Andrieu (S&D, France), chair of the special committee, after the first debate, constructive but lively, which took place in Brussels on Thursday 27 September on the draft report by the committee for evaluating the authorisation procedure for pesticides in the EU after the controversial renewal for five years of the licence for glyphosate (see EUROPE 12100).
He said that before the amendments, he reminded people of their responsibility as an ambitious report was needed because the stakes are about guaranteeing the health of citizens, starting with European farmers. He said the collective work was part of the specifications that had been voted through – revising the protocol of authorisation for putting molecules on the market. The deadline for the tabling of amendments is 11 October.
Among the recommendations put forward by the co-rapporteurs are: harmonising and reinforcing the resources of European and national agencies, the European Commission’s designating of a rapporteur member state, applying the precautionary principle , unified rules at the EFSA for the assessment of active substances, verification by the Commission of the effectiveness of the division into zones, a stronger audit of all certified laboratories, a public register of certified laboratories, a public register of all studies and raw data in a useable format, public access to all scientific studies before EFSA makes an assessment, taking account of companies’ commercial interests, speeding up mutual recognition of national authorizations of phytopharma product.
Our watchword is evolution, not revolution, said German co-rapporteur Norbert Lins (EPP), saying that the EU system was the strictest in the world but while Regulation 1107/2009 regulating the placing on the market of pesticides and it implementation can be improved, one shouldn’t pit agriculture against the environment.
Greens/EFA co-rapporteur Bart States (Belgium) stressed the precautionary principle as a key principle which evaluators and risk managers had to adhere to, and the need to have strong authorities to ensure the proper functioning of the authorisation procedure.
Jytte Guteland (S&D, Sweden) insisted on the need to ensure full independence and more transparency in the evaluations, and announced amendments in favour of an improvement in declarations of interest, measures to reduce risk for certain active substance and improving the surveillance system for after a product is placed on the market.
Anthea McIntyre (United Kingdom), on behalf of the CRE group, said some recommendations undermined the European authorisation system and there were not any gaps to be filled in the legislation, but improvements to be made to implementation.
Frédérique Ries (ALDE, Belgium) said the report respected sensitive balances in the political groups. She said the two-level system (EFSA with power for active substances and the member states for products) was "wobbly" but they had approved it less than ten years ago and she understood the rapporteurs’ caution.
Younous Omarjee (GUE/NGL, France) was astonished that after the glyphosate scandal, the report didn’t say much about these unhealthy collusions, and not a word about the Monsanto Papers. Amendments will be tabled in this connection on the need to take account of the real effects, of cocktails of pesticides and the cumulative long-term effects of pesticides.
Piernicola Pedicini (ELDD, Italy) called for vigilance over the import of substances from countries that use pesticides galore and push European farmers to do the same to avoid unfair competition. What good is the safest authorisation procedure if we continue to import products that do not meet our draconian standards under free-trade agreements?, asked Philippe Loiseau (ENL, France).
Andrieu said he was disappointed that the hearing of Aimee H. Wagstaff, the US lawyer coordinating the class action lawsuits of plaintiffs against Monsanto, due to take place on 24 September, had been cancelled (see EUROPE 12085). She will now be answering questions in writing. (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)