0
Home
News
Directory
E-newsletter
Magazine
Events
Data
AgReport
Subscribe
EU dismisses fears over agchem losses
Aug. 18, 2008
The European Commission has dismissed fears expressed by the UK that the forthcoming revision of the EU agrochemical registration Directive (91/414) will lead to a significant loss of pesticides from the market. In a letter to the UK Home-Grown Cereals Authority (HGCA), the Commission says that such claims are "unjustified" and estimates that active ingredient losses due to the proposed hazard-based criteria would range from 2% to 4%.
The Commission's letter, published on the UK Farmers Guardian website, came from Robert Madelin, the director general of the Commission’s Directorate General for public health and consumer protection. He was writing on behalf of EU Health and Consumer Protection Commissioner Androula Vassiliou. HGCA chairman Jonathan Tipples had written to the Commissioner about the proposal to introduce hazard-based criteria in the EU agrochemical assessment system, which currently uses a risk-based approach. He highlighted an earlier study from the UK Pesticides Safety Directorate (PSD), which concluded such criteria would remove key pesticides and result in crop yields falling by some 30%. In particular, the HGCA expressed concern about the potential loss of triazole fungicides and herbicides for blackgrass (Alopecurus myosuroides) control.
The PSD studied 286 ais and forecast that the Commission's proposed hazard criteria could remove from 5% to 15% of them. Some 24% of ais would become "candidates for substitution", making them vulnerable to removal at a later date or subject to shorter approval periods. The PSD forecast that ai losses would be considerably higher under additional hazard criteria proposed by the European Parliament, although the Commission has so far rejected the Parliament's amendments.
Mr Madelin argues that the Commission's proposal would affect only a few ais that are the most problematic ones for human health or the environment. The Commission's estimates, based on a total of 505 ais, that only 4% of ais would disappear because they are endocrine disruptors and only 2% because they are carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic to reproduction, he points out.
The Commission refutes the PSD's conclusions on the basis that its impact assessment "is based only on a worst case scenario and on unrealistic figures". Mr Madelin points out that the PSD study did not consider new ais under evaluation, certain ais in the third round of the ongoing EU review of existing ais, or all the ais in the fourth round. The fourth round includes micro-organisms, plant and animal extracts, and attractants and repellents.
The Commission also questions the forecast impact of the endocrine disruption criteria. "It is not expected that all substances listed as possible endocrine disruptors by the PSD evaluation, on the basis of the chemical class they belong to, will finally be classified as such after a scientific evaluation," Mr Madelin notes. This applies in particular to triazoles, he adds.
The Commission disputes the predicted impact of its proposals on the market because it reasons that most of the ais likely to be affected will have already been removed under the EU review. Any impact should be considered at the point when the new rules come into force, Mr Madelin says. By this time, several ais will have failed to complete the review programme and been removed due to concerns other than toxicological classification, such as potential for groundwater contamination, unacceptable operator exposure, and intolerable risk to consumers from residues, he points out.
Moreover, the Commission stresses that there will be time to adapt because the new criteria will apply to already approved ais only at the renewal of their approval. For most of these ais, this renewal will happen from 2016, Mr Madelin says. The Commission considers this an incentive for industry to develop safer alternatives.
Source: Agrow
More from AgroNews
Change
Hot TopicSubscribe
| Subscribe Email: | * | |
| Name: | ||
| Mobile Number: | ||
Comment
0/1200
NEWSLETTER