MEPs agreed that the public should be granted access to the
studies used in the procedure to authorise a pesticide,
including all the supporting data and information relating
to the applications, thus endorsing one of the many
proposals put forward by the “Special committee on the
European Union’s authorisation procedure for pesticides”
which has been examining the issue for the past year. The
Special committee report was adopted with 526 votes to 66
and 72 abstentions.
During the procedure, applicants should be required to
register all regulatory studies that will be carried out in
a public register, and allow for a “comment period”, during
which stakeholders are able to provide additional existing
data to ensure that all relevant information is taken into
account before a decision is made.
Post-market evaluation and real-life
impact
MEPs call on the European Commission to propose measures to
protect vulnerable groups and put an end to pesticides
being used over long distances in the vicinity of schools,
childcare facilities, playing fields, hospitals, maternity
hospitals and care homes.
Post-market evaluation should be strengthened, and the EU
Commission should launch an epidemiological study on the
real-life impact of pesticides on human health, MEPs say.
They also propose that existing studies on carcinogenicity
of glyphosate should be reviewed and maximum residue levels
for soils and surface water should be set.
EU Commission should allocate the authorisation
renewal
MEPs note that concerns have been raised about the right of
applicants to choose a particular member state to report on
the approval of an active substance to the European Food
Safety Authority (EFSA), as this practice is seen as
lacking in transparency and could entail a conflict of
interests. They call on the EU Commission to allocate the
authorisation renewal to a different member state.
Political accountability
MEPs finally stress the need to ensure political
accountability when authorisation is adopted in the form of
implementing acts - in the so-called “comitology
procedure”. Commission and member states should publish
detailed minutes and make their votes public.
Quotes
"It is crucial that the approval procedure remains
science-based. On such an important issue, scientific
research is the be-all and end-all. Interests or ideologies
have no place here. This decision must not be dependent on
daily politics or emotions", said
co-rapporteur Norbert Lins (EPP,
DE) .
“ "The Special Committee has brought to light serious
shortcomings in the authorisation of pesticides. The PEST
report and the EP is now demanding big improvements. The
overwhelming support for reform of the pesticide
authorisation procedure through more transparency and
independent research is a wakeup call for EU governments
and the European Commission, as well as a way forward to
restore citizens’ trust in EU decision-making.", said
co-rapporteur Bart
Staes (Greens/EFA, BE) .
“Recent revelations about plagiarism confirm that the work
of our investigative committee was necessary. We urge the
European Commission to review the pesticide authorisation
system in Europe and to immediately re-evaluate the
authorisation of glyphosate", said Committee
Chairman Eric
Andrieu (S&D, FR) .
Background
Nine years after the adoption of the Plant Protection
Products Regulation (Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009) and
following the controversy about the renewal of glyphosate,
the European Parliament, on 6 February 2018, set up a
Special committee on the European Union’s authorisation
procedure for pesticides. The PEST Committee’s mandate, as
laid down in Parliament’s decision of 6 February 2018,
required the special committee to look into the EU’s
authorisation procedure for pesticides as a whole.
