Strasbourg, 16/11/2005 (Agence Europe) - Tension was mounting and there were the most contradictory rumours in the corridors of the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Wednesday, the day before the vote at first reading on REACH legislation proposed for a European policy for the registration, evaluation and authorisation of chemical products in the EU. Despite the many requests for separate votes for many amendments (requests mainly made by the EPP-ED Group), the rumour that postponement of the vote until 1 December nonetheless seemed somewhat wild, given the majority support of the EPP-ED/PES/ALDE alliance to the Sacconi/Nassauer compromise on the procedure for registration of chemical substances. At the time of going to press, the Conference of Presidents was to settle the matter, and it seemed likely that the strategy of breaking the vote down into separate parts, thus complicating it, would not triumph. The PES and ALDE Groups were keen to hold the vote held as were the Greens/EFA and GUE/NGL, although they were hostile to a compromise which, in their view, empties of all content the proposal for key legislation on the protection of human health and the environment. If the vote is held on Thursday, there will be open speculation about the fate reserved for authorisation procedure - another vital element of REACH. While the system proposed by the environment committee (authorisation restricted to five years and taking into account the existence of safer alternatives in application of the principle of substituting the most dangerous substances with less harmful existing substances) seemed, on Tuesday, to be winning the day with the ALDE Group's late refusal to support this solution leaving a doubt as to the outcome of the vote - to the great displeasure of Chris Davies (British) and Frédérique Ries (Belgian), with the “dissident” Liberals openly willing to support the compromise of the Greens/EFA (EUROPE 9068).
During the debate on Tuesday, the main rapporteur, Guido Sacconi (PES, Italy), was applauded for his tremendous work as rapporteur of the environment committee and as a determined negotiator with all the political groups. The European Commission's official position on most of the amendments, and especially its support to the majority compromise on the procedure for registration of chemical substances, were the high point of the debate. Other than an attempt to circulate a document presented as its official position without prior debate in Council, the Commission had hitherto reserved its point of view.
Günter Verheugen, Industry Commissioner, thanked Guido Sacconi for having been such a keen defender of health albeit open to compromise. He also thanked Hartmut Nassauer (EPP-ED, Germany) for having worked to defend competitiveness and innovation. Among the amendments supported by the Commission, he cited:
- the Sacconi/Nassauer compromise on the registration and exchange of information (OSOR) which, in his opinion, shows “excellent balance” between the objectives of competitiveness, on one hand, and those of health protection and the environment, on the other, by limiting as far as possible the burden on industry and the future chemical products Agency; - the clarification of provisions relating to excluding from the scope of REACH waste, foodstuffs, biocides and pesticides, and those stipulating that REACH will not amend the “cosmetic products” directive which aims to prevent animal testing; - clarification of requirements applicable to minerals and resins as well as to other substances present in nature; - the introduction of a threshold of one tonne per year to determine cases where downstream users should establish a security report on substances; - the strengthened role of the future chemical products Agency, on condition that the most is made of Member States' expertise; - effective authorisation procedure, which makes risk and adequate control key concepts and which is able to encourage the principle of substitution for particularly worrying substances, on condition that a competitive disadvantage is not given to European industry compared to its American or Asian rivals, and especially its Chinese rival. On condition also that the Agency is not overloaded for no reason as it is to publish an annual report on its work programme, and especially on substances that it chooses as candidates for authorisation in a foreseeable timeframe. The Commission can also accept authorisation of chemical substances, on a case by case basis, with a revision clause.
Stavros Dimas, Environment Commissioner, was convinced that, once implemented, REACH would considerably improve the knowledge of the properties of chemical products, largely unknown to date, and thus contribute to strengthening security and citizens' confidence. In his view, the Sacconi/Nassauer compromise is a positive step forward on one of the main points of the proposal. The package is balanced as it focuses on the most dangerous products, provides for information requirements proportionate to the risks and a specific procedure for substances produced or imported in small quantities. Mr Dimas considered as “very interesting” the amendments aimed at setting a time limit for authorisation validity, but it is appropriate, he believes, to define this time limit on a case-by-case and substance-by-substance basis.
The Greens/EFA Group expressed indignation when speaking to the press that there was so much praise for a compromise that will trim down to 12,000 the number of substances evaluated instead of 30,000 as initially planned.