Brussels, 02/03/2005 (Agence Europe) - With parliamentary preparations for the first reading examination of the REACH regulation on the registration, evaluation and authorisation for chemical products stepping up, the Alliance of Liberal and Democrats for Europe) (ALDE) of the European Parliament is making tracks. Its objective is to work towards consensus on this masterpiece of the Community's legislative arsenal- a consensus bringing together the need for competitiveness in the European chemical industry and the no less legitimate imperative of the protection of public health and the environment. The first-reading vote is planned for October.
“We feel that our group will have a central role in any agreement coming from the Parliament. Several parliamentary committees are involved in this dossier, but we can make all the difference in the plenary. We hope for a position of solidarity. A competitive industry in Europe cannot be based on environment policy which is wanting”, explained group president Graham Watson at a press conference in Brussels on Wednesday.
Lena Ek of Sweden, who has just submitted her report to the committee on industry, welcomed the “launch of a debate on an explosive subject, but one which is extremely important for bringing in identical rules throughout the internal market and combining legislation, which has always been fragmented, into one single text”. Her report proposes: -the exclusion of recycled materials and paper pulp from the scope of the regulation (the latter should be subject to separate legislation); -right of information for all users of chemical products, a principle of care and monitoring, an obligation to share information on the toxicity, biodegradability and accumulation in the body of substances; -the assessment of all substances produced or imported in small amounts (between one and ten tonnes), to allow a fair balance between the criterion of volume and that of risk, and to tackle the problem of the most dangerous substances as soon as possible; -a simplified registration procedure for companies producing or importing substances which have already been registered by other companies for several years; -the “one substance, one registration” principle, applicable in 95% of cases to allow the smallest SMEs an opt-out, based on various criteria, but left up to the discretion of companies to make life easier for them; -sharing out the costs between companies for the settlement of the final invoice; -the conclusion of bilateral agreements with third countries to share knowledge and data on the safety of substances with poor countries which are concerned about the effects of REACH on their trade relations with the EU, but also with countries such as Canada, which have a much stricter system, allowing them to limit animal testing; -more funds for research. “We are constantly holding talks with all stakeholders, including the European Commission. Things are moving forward. The results of the Commission's sectorial impact study will be published in April. We must take this on board”, added Lena Ek.
Speaking on behalf of the committee on the internal market and consumer protection, the German Alexander Graf Lambsdorff said how important it was that REACH does not jeopardize the smooth running of the internal market, that the protection of intellectual property is guaranteed by a voluntary system together with a non-participation clause and that the European Chemicals Agency is strong enough to guarantee that the same rules are applied throughout Europe. He feels that the Agency should gather information from the Member States and make them available, assess registration dossiers and substances, stay in touch with the competent national authorities and play a role in the labelling of substances to determine which are in line with REACH requirements. The spirit in which the ALDE group and MEPs in general work is, Mr Lambsdorff feels, in line with what was concluded from the public hearing in January at the EP (see EUROPE of 20 January, p.12), i.e. “the willingness of all parties to improve the proposal, smooth off the corners, in order to end up with something reasonable and which works”.
Chris Davies of the UK, who is a member of the committee on the environment and public health, the project leader for this dossier, stressed the changes already made to the proposal to make the system more practicable and cheaper for businesses. It is true that “political differences remain between the approach of industry and that of the environmentalists” (the 250 amendments proposed by CEFIC bear this out), but in future, industry recognises that the MEPs and governments are doing all in their power to take these concerns on board. And this, Mr Davies said, is a very good thing.