- An EU-wide regime
Despite the controversies surrounding the dossier, most parties seem to agree on the need for an EU-wide system for the authorisation of substances used in pesticides, given the complications involved in having 27 different authorisation regimes.
The regulation outlines a widely-endorsed two-step system, whereby a 'positive list of active substances' (ingredients used in the production of pesticides) is established at European level. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and a committee of experts from the member states are to provide scientific guidance.
Once the list is established, it will be up to member states to then authorise the production of individual pesticides using the approved substances.
At issue in the debate is the criteria for approving substances and the kinds of substances banned from authorisation. MEPs in the ENVI Committee want to add potentially neurotoxic and immunotixic pesticides to the Commission's proposed list of banned substances on the basis of their "intrinsic" risk to humans.
But pesticide producers say that the ENVI Committee's proposed changes will "lead to the disappearance of many substances that have long been used safely by farmers and which farmers need to protect their crops from disease".
- Zones and timelines
The Commission has proposed a system of pesticides authorisation according to three EU geographic zones - north, centre and south - with mutual recognition of approval decisions between the zones.
Most MEPs appear to reject the idea, however, and favour instead the authority of individual member states to either approve, reject or restrict pesticides approved in other member states.
MEPs also appear to favour shorter approval periods for substances than the Commission, which has proposed a 10-year approval period for most new substances, with low-risk ones being permitted for 15 years. Under the plans, substances that could be 'easily replaced' with less toxic ones should only be authorised for seven years.
But the ENVI Committee suggested a five-year instead of a seven-year period for replacable products. MEPs also disagree with the Commission over the renewal of substance authorisations: the Commission favours an indefinite renewal once a substance has been initially approved for a ten-year period, but MEPs argue that a substance authorisation should only be renewed once, and "for a period not exceeding ten years".
- Limiting use
The question of how and where pesticides can be used seems to be a more controversial issue within the Parliament.
A proposal by the Greens to ban pesticide use within ten metres of water sources is being criticised by the EPP-ED group, which argues that farmers in areas with water surrounding their fields (such as in The Netherlands) would be too restricted.
The EPP-ED group is also critical of 'excessive' obligations on farmers to provide information to public authorities about the pesticides they use, arguing that this will create too much 'red tape'.
- A rapid conclusion?
The Council is looking for a quick vote on the file, and the Portuguese EU Presidency is pushing for political agreement during the 17 December Agriculture Council.
