In Brussels last week I was anxious to update myself on the progress of the EU's planned changes to pesticides policy. You may remember that a few months ago we were warned we could be forced to leave wide unsprayed headlands, notify neighbours whenever we got the sprayer out and accept much tighter restrictions on the use of chemicals.
Then, a few weeks ago, news filtered out that the most stringent of these proposals had been rejected and that we could probably live with what was left. What was the real situation, I wondered? For I was aware that the proposals had still not completed their complicated process of ratification.
Well, as I now understand the situation, National Action Plans to limit pesticide use and to improve application are still part of the proposed legislation. Here in the UK, of course, we have the Voluntary Initiative which covers the same areas. The likelihood, I am told, is that this will become compulsory.
The much wider unsprayed field boundaries originally called for have disappeared but the banning of all "hazardous" substances is still there. This would mean that a safety factor of 2000 to 1 would be ignored if such a substance is contained within the product and would, for instance, rule out such sprays as Mancazeb and Gluphosinate.
Moreover, the number of substances that would be permitted would come down from about 1,000 to 300 taking some 80% of insecticides in particular out of use. Furthermore, another 10%, including pyrethroids, could also be withdrawn on the basis of their persistence.
If passed into legislation this measure could leave many crops unprotected. This especially applies to minority crops which are unattractive to chemical companies because of the high costs of development and limited potential sales.
I was assured in Brussels last week that these proposals were formulated mainly on the back of lobbying by single issue pressure groups and that no scientific opinions were asked for. The only reason some measures have been dropped was because MEP's with rural constituencies voted them out.
But, as indicated above, serious concerns remain and it will need over half of all MEP's to vote against to stop them becoming law. Is that likely? I don't know. But it certainly seems worth writing an urgent letter to your MEP to at least try to get him or her on side.
Comments (1)
David
My understanding is that the resrictions proposed surrounding the use of hazardous compounds relates to the review of directive 91/414. The Plant Proterction Products Directive. No matter it will have dire consquences for Agriculture in the EU.
You will not be surprised to know that the Crop Protection Industry are lobbying MPs and MEPs but I applaud your call to arms for farmers to write to MEPs on this matter as I suspect that this will be much more powerful.
Best Regards
Steve Higginbotham
Posted by Steve Higginbotham | January 14, 2008 1:31 PM
Posted on January 14, 2008 13:31