It appears that the proposal to allow the use of glyphosate in EU agriculture for another ten years will not be approved unchanged.
Not only are LNV ministers of some countries obstructive, but there are also concerns and doubts in the European Parliament for various reasons. It has already been hinted that the European Commission will have to come up with an amended proposal.
Brussels recently proposed, after years of studies and research, to authorize glyphosate for another ten years, under two minor EU-wide restrictions. In addition, countries could impose additional restrictions of their own, as France has recently done.
According to European Commissioner Stella Kyriakides (Food Safety & Health), countries can impose their own restrictions, for example for certain crops or provinces, or for certain crops. Or for flowers and plants, but not for food.
This individual approach is supported by most EU countries, but not by Germany and Austria (which want a total ban), and probably not by France and the Netherlands either.
In that case, there will be no qualified majority in the SCoPAFF committee next week to support the proposal, not even for a EU-wide ban on glyphosate. This also happened last year, after which the European Commission had to decide on its own to grant a temporary extension to enable additional research.
At the request of the Party for the Animals, the European Parliament discussed the proposal on Wednesday, and already gave Commissioner Kyriakides a few shots ahead. As might be expected, the left and green parties opposed the proposal and demanded a ban applicable to the entire EU. Some are even threatening legal action against the Commission.
MEP Anja Hazekamp (PvdD) pointed to scientific links between the use of glyphosate and the development of cancer and Parkinson's, the rapidly rising costs of purifying drinking water and the erosion of biodiversity.
The liberal Renew faction noted that this pesticide is apparently not dangerous enough to be removed from the market, as was done at the time with asbestos.
But even EU politicians from agri-friendly factions such as EVP/CDA and ECR/SGP, who say they are in favor of a 'limited' extension, say that glyphosate must ultimately be 'phased out'. They also warn of the risk that could arise if each country introduced all kinds of its own criteria, which could lead to competition between farmers from the various EU member states within the common agricultural policy.
Commissioner Kyriakides emphasized that the ten-year permit could be shortened or revoked if new scientific evidence emerges in the meantime about the harmfulness of glyphosate. But if the ministers within the EU are not on the same page, and if parliament is very divided, then the chance that those two bodies will subsequently reach an agreement is very small.
At the end of last week, two generally reliable sources in Brussels reported that the European Commission is now working on a possible compromise. The permit would be valid for a maximum of five years, and a few additional European restrictions would be imposed. In that case, such a compromise could come to the vote in the second half of October or the first half of November.