Jean-Charles Bocquet of the European Crop Protection Association (ECPA) has urged member states to be mindful of potentially 'significant consequences' regarding the discussion, and possible vote, on the draft implementing regulation for the renewal of the active substance Glyphosate, which will be put to the Standing Committee this week.
In an open letter, Bocquet said that the ECPA was aware of the concern that the reapproval of Glyphosate had caused, as well as the political pressure a potential vote placed on member countries, but he urged them to consider all scientific evidence before making a decision as well as taking into account the future of farmers' crop protection needs.
'We firmly believe that the EU’s scientific evaluation carried out to determine the re-approval of glyphosate is robust, and presents no reason for a reapproval of less than 15 years,' he outlined. 'We understand from copies of the proposal seen by the media that the Commission intends to propose an approval period of nine years.
'We see no reason, nor are we aware of any new scientific evidence, that would give the Commission cause to reduce the length of the approval from the 15 years set out in its original proposal to Member States in March. Such a precedent would undermine the process of substance approvals for the future, which form an important part of a farmer’s tool box allowing EU farmers to remain competitive in a global market, that is of particular concern.'
Bocquet also raised concerns about the process behind the non-binding resolution made by the European Parliament last month, noting that while it had disregarded 'important elements' such as thethe assessment of the Rapporteur Member State, Germany and EFSA’s conclusion, it had actually made reference to the opinion of IARC, despite its opinions not being part of the EU decision making process.
'Calling the approval system into question in this way – a system approved by the Parliament, Council and Commission - only serves to raise alarm amongst European consumers who this very system is designed to protect,' he explained.
'We trust that in making your decision, you will do so mindful of the significant consequences the decision could have for the credibility of the EU system at a critical moment for European agriculture; a system that ensures safe, sustainable and affordable food for over 500m European citizens.'
