===========================

European Commission - Environment - 26-06-2007

Pesticides: friend or foe?

The Environment Committee today endorsed plans by the European
Commission for a ban on aerial spraying with pesticides, as part of a
wide-ranging strategy to cut down the use of these products which are
needed by farmers but can be highly damaging to human health and the
environment.

Current EU legislation on pesticides deals with two stages in their
life: the "placing on the market" stage and the "end of life-cycle"
stage (when pesticides turn into residue or waste).  To "fill the
gap", or deal with the period in between when pesticides are actually
being used, the Commission in July 2006 put forward a Thematic
Strategy on the Sustainable Use of Pesticides.

The first piece of legislation generated by the strategy is a draft
framework directive on the sustainable use of pesticides, on which the
Environment Committee gave its verdict today when it voted on a first-
reading report by Christa Klass (EPP-ED, DE).

Measures proposed by the European Commission to tackle the use of
pesticides include:

- national action plans by Member States to identify the crops,
activities or areas most at risk from pesticides, together with
targets for tackling the problems;
- training for professional users of pesticides and awareness-raising
for the public;
- rules on inspections of pesticide equipment and on the handling and
storage of pesticides;
- special measures to protect water from pesticide pollution;
- special measures to identify areas where zero or very little
pesticide use is to be allowed;
- a ban on aerial spraying with pesticides, albeit with derogations.

MEPs back ban on aerial spraying

A proposal in the draft report to replace the Commission's proposed
ban on aerial spraying with a requirement for Member States simply to
"regulate" such spraying was rejected by the committee, which thus
opted to endorse the ban, with some modifications.

Aim of the legislation

MEPs voted variously to minimise or eliminate rather than just
"reduce" the risks of pesticides.  Elsewhere they seek to scale down
not just the "risks" of pesticides (as the Commission proposes), but
the very "use" of these products.  The report also insists that the
directive should apply not only to agricultural contexts but also to
non-agricultural ones.

National action plans

The committee backs the idea of national action plans (NAPs) but
insists they include a specific EU reduction target of 25% within 5
years, and 50% within 10 years, as well as national targets for
particularly active or toxic substances.  The report also calls for
Member States to set up a system of taxes or levies on pesticides to
fund the NAPs.

Training, inspections and buffer zones

MEPs back the Commission's plans to require training for pesticide
users and distributors but lay down more stringent, detailed rules on
this point, as they also do for the clauses on awareness and
information programmes for pesticide users.

To protect water courses, the Commission proposed "buffer zones" where
pesticides may not be used or stored. MEPs specified that these zones
should be at least 10 metres wide. They also voted to ban pesticides
in all areas used by the general public (e.g. parks, school grounds,
residential areas) and in "substantial no-spray zones" around them.

Firm reduction targets needed

The committee also adopted an own-initiative report by Irena
Belohorská (NA, SK) on the Thematic Strategy itself.  The report
welcomes the strategy and its main objective of filling the
legislative gap on pesticides by dealing with the "use phase".
However, MEPs urge the Commission to extend the scope of the strategy
to include biocides.

The committee endorses the "'substitution principle" whereby more
dangerous substances will be removed from the market where safer
alternatives exist. It also stresses that only "quantitative use
reduction targets" in the national action plans will push governments
to lower the amount of pesticides used.  The Member States are urged
to promote low pesticide-input farming and organic farming, giving
priority to non-chemical alternatives.

Pros and cons of pesticides

The benefits of pesticides are that they maximise farm yields and
product quality, minimise labour input, help meet plant health
requirements and allow trade in farm products.  Outside farming,
pesticides are used for wood and fabric preservation and public health
protection.

On the other hand, pesticides have been linked to immunological and
endocrine-disrupting effects as well as cancer. Foetuses, children,
pregnant women and the elderly are particularly vulnerable.

25/06/2007
Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
In the chair: : Miroslav Ouzký (EPP-ED, CZ)
Procedures: Co-decision, first reading (Klass) - Own initiative
(Belohorská)
Plenary vote: September I, Strasbourg


http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/expert/infopress_page/064-8251-176-06-26-911-20070625IPR08232-25-06-2007-2007-false/default_en.htm

===========================

Wednesday 27 June 2007

MEPs vote to ban pesticide use around public areas

Many amendments adopted by the Environment Committee lay down tougher
rules than the Commission originally proposed.
Brief News:

Members of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food
Safety voted on the Thematic Strategy for Pesticides and the proposal
for a Framework Directive on the Sustainable Use of Pesticides.

"Voting by a large majority (34 for, 11 against, one abstention), the
Committee supported a clear choice to take further steps towards a
definitive ban on pesticides asking member states for a progressive
reduction in their use from -25% in the next five years to -50% within
the next decade," said Roberto Musacchio, shadow rapporteur for the
GUE/NGL's Pesticides Framework Directive proposal.

Georgina Down, of the UK Pesticides Campaigns, said: "Considering the
distances pesticides have been shown to travel then the Committee was
absolutely right to vote in favour of substantial no-spray zones in
fields around residential areas, school grounds, playgrounds and other
areas where members of the public may be exposed, as small buffer
zones or 'strips' would clearly be completely inadequate to prevent
public exposure to pesticides, especially in relation to the
protection of children and other vulnerable groups."

The European Crop Association (ECPA) warns that such targets (a usage
reduction of 50%) will not only result in economic losses for farmers
who will not be able to protect their crops against pest and diseases,
but also have an impact on the high quality and affordability of feed
and food produced in Europe.

"[We] regret that MEPs did not opt for a system which would
effectively curb the increasing over-use of pesticides in Europe and
guarantee greater protection of health and the environment," said a
group of NGOs including EEB, FoE, HEAL and PAN Europe.

The Thematic Strategy for Pesticides and the proposal for a Framework
Directive on the Sustainable Use of Pesticides must now be examined at
the end of June 2007 by the Agriculture Council and also possibly by
the Environment Council.

http://tinyurl.com/2fsula