Brussels, 25/01/2000 (Agence Europe) - While waiting for the European exegesis of the "precautionary principle" that the Commission is preparing to provide through a communication, the European Environmental Bureau (EEB), broad network of European environmental NGOs, has launched an appeal to the Commission for it not to restrain implementation of the principle for financial concerns. According to the EEB, the precautionary principle, introduced in the 1992 Treaty on the Union but never defined, warrants early action in case of scientific uncertainty or ignorance when it comes to the potential dangers of products of activities, so as to prevent any unacceptable harm for the environment or human health. The mad cow crisis, the scandal of dioxin-contaminated food, the potential dangers of phtalates in toys, risks linked to GMOs… experience has taught the Union that belated action can cause a much heavier burden on society than proportionate measures, based on a reasonable degree of suspicion and adopted in time, the EEB stresses. Thus, it says, the use of the principle should therefore be encouraged and not restricted. The key-elements which the EEB recommends respecting for the appropriate implementation of the precautionary principle have been set out in a Memorandum. These are:
Early action on the basis of reasonable suspicion of harm;
Having observed "the considerable pressure both from the Commission and from EU and foreign economic stakeholders to attach cost-benefit qualifications to the precautionary principle", the EEB that a formal cost-benefit analysis is in contradiction with the precautionary principle, as it assumes certainty where by definition it does not exist. "We are not opposed to economic assessment, but a cost-benefit analysis would render the principle less effective in future", it states in its press release.
Nor does the EEB accept that risk assessment might become a "filter" before precautionary action may be triggered. It recalls here that risk assessment has been proved to be a cumbersome, bureaucratic approach in the Union's chemicals policy "leading to considerable delays in action, and hence not being in line with precaution".
Regretting the fact that that Commission has not officially consulted the different stakeholders (they have not been informed of the content or scope of the document it is preparing), the EEB expresses the fear that "a non-transparent and non-participatory process might end in many restrictions for using the precautionary principle", and recalls that, on several occasions, it has stressed that the Commission allow for a wider public debate on the Commission's interpretation of the precautionary principle.