The European Parliament’s Committee on the Environment (ENVI) hopes to be able to vote on amendments to the draft report by Sarah Wiener (Greens/EFA, Austrian) on the sustainable use of pesticides on 18 July, MEPs said on Thursday 2 March.
The vote in the European Parliament plenary is scheduled for September, according to a timetable agreed by MEPs in the Environment Committee.
However, this committee was divided on the approach advocated by Ms Wiener, who tabled her initial amendments to the European Commission’s proposal. In summary, the EPP, ECR and ID groups find the suggestions of Ms Wiener in her draft report (see EUROPE 13132/6) unacceptable or unrealistic.
“There is a scientific consensus that pesticides are fuelling the biodiversity crisis”, said Ms Wiener, who sees pesticide dependency as a long-term threat to food security. She said she had a clear objective: to protect public health and the environment, but also to support agriculture in the necessary reduction of pesticides. “I want to work with farmers, not against them”, she assured.
Alexander Bernhuber (EPP, Austrian) criticised the draft report’s even more ambitious targets (-80% for the most hazardous pesticides) than those in the European Commission’s proposal (-50%) on reducing pesticide use. He also denounced the “shortcomings” of the draft report on banning pesticides in sensitive areas.
For Maria Arena (S&D, Belgian), on the contrary, “it is pesticides that endanger food safety”. She therefore welcomed Ms Wiener’s draft report. On the harmonised risk indicator, she considered that as it is currently calculated, it discriminates against the least toxic products to the advantage of synthetic pesticides. In addition, drinking water catchment areas should be, according to Ms Arena, “zero pesticide zones”.
Jan Huitema (Renew Europe, Dutch) called for a “conditionality” on the 50% reduction in pesticide use in the form of replacement of phased-out products with alternatives. However, this is not included in Ms Wiener’s draft report, he regretted.
Sylvia Limmer (ID, German) criticised the “absurd concepts” disseminated by the Greens/EFA group and Alexandr Vondra (ECR, Czech) found the draft report as presented to be “unacceptable”.
The draft report is a very good piece of work, said Anja Hazekamp (GUE/NGL, Dutch), who regretted the delays in the examination of the proposal due to lobbying by the pesticide industry.
Differences in timing. Clara Aguilera (S&D, Spanish), rapporteur on pesticides for the Committee on Agriculture, was unable to attend Friday’s debate in the Committee on the Environment.
The other speakers in the Committee on Agriculture, except Martin Häusling (Greens/EFA, German), criticised the content of Ms Wiener’s draft report and asked, before negotiating compromises, to see the data that the European Commission is to produce, at the request of the EU Council, on the impact of the proposal on food production.
At a press conference, Ms Wiener deplored the fact that members of the European Parliament Committee on Agriculture had “really done nothing” to help find a compromise. These blocking techniques are questionable, she said.
The Chair of the European Parliament’s Committee on Agriculture, Norbert Lins (EPP, German), noted that the Committee on the Environment had finally reached agreement on “its” timetable. “Negotiations between the European Parliament’s Agriculture and Environment Committees can now begin to find a common timetable on the draft report on pesticides”, he concluded. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)