The future of glyphosate herbicide. Position of the crop protection industry
As has been made public recently, the European Parliament meeting in Luxembourg in plenary on April 13 agreed to propose the renewal of the authorization of the herbicide glyphosate in Europe for 7 years instead of 15 which is usual, rejecting that way the application for an injunction had been requested by some groups. However, given the information that since yesterday are appearing in the media, we need to make some remarks and clarify some aspects:
The vote in the European Parliament last April 13 for the proposed renewal of the active substance glyphosate for seven years, it is just that, a proposal, and in any case the result is binding. It will be the European Council, who ultimately make the decision on the future of Europe glyphosate in the coming months.
Approval and renewal of active substances in the EU is governed by Regulation 1107/2009. In this process, the EFSA (European Food Safety Agency) is responsible for conducting the scientific assessment body, and therefore its role in this process, like the rest of regulatory bodies established by law, must be respected by all both Community and national institutions.
According to Regulation 1107/2009, the approval and renewal of active substances depend entirely on assessments Rapporteur Member State (in the case of glyphosate, Germany) and EFSA as well as the decision of the Commission with the I support a vote in the standing Committee on plant protection products (SCoPAFF). Therefore, the European Parliament and the Council should ensure that legislation is respected recognizing the role of the agency and regulatory authorities.
IARC is not an EU body, so it is not an official part in the process of making EU decisions with regard to the approval or renewal of active substances and in the process of evaluating them. Still, the work of the IARC was reviewed by EFSA in its assessments, which did not prevent him to reach a positive conclusion on glyphosate, considering all possible evidence to consider.
It should be noted that both Germany, as Rapporteur Member State and EFSA, based on its scientific assessments, glyphosate considered safe when used properly, and therefore concluded that the substance is not carcinogenic. Furthermore, the presence of pesticides residues in food and water are supervised by EFSA, and usually, the samples analyzed in relation to glyphosate are completely undetectable. In the vast majority of cases, if present, the residues are within legally permitted limits and always well below the threshold that could pose a risk to human health.
Regarding access to data and the studies requested by NGOs and Commission regarding this renewal dossier is understandable that there willing legal measures to prevent disclosure of confidential business information when it comes to these substances in order to protect intellectual property and investment in innovation. This must be respected and taken into account by Parliament and others. These rules not only apply to the crop protection industry, as there are similar rules for biocides, industrial chemicals and cosmetics, including perfumes. However, to address public and political concern, we believe our companies involved are considering a mechanism to facilitate some access in this particular case.
Since the crop protection industry, we regret that the outcome of the EP vote last April 13 not support the proposal of EFSA to extend the authorization for 15 years and suggest the ban to non-professional use without scientific basis to justify it. Any renewal is subject to revision when it appears relevant information, which limit the period adds nothing to security and introduces unnecessary suspicions about the approval system in the minds of citizens. Plant protection products are a key tool for farmers and domestic users in areas of the EU, and this includes products containing glyphosate. We need our farmers to remain competitive, while ensuring the protection of human health and the environment.
Therefore, we hope that the decision finally adopted by the states represented in the European Council is based on scientific and not ideological reasons that could jeopardize the future of European agriculture.
Business Association for the Protection of Plants (AEPLA)
