The European Commission’s review of endocrine disruptors in crop protection products should consider both risk and exposure of any harmful substances, an MP has warned.
Conservative MEP, Anthea McIntyre, has said the EC should be “led by science” in its latest review of the Plant Protection Products Regulation, in which the definition of endocrine disruptors will be questioned.
The review has generated fears across the industry that a number of active substances could now be classed as endocrine disruptors and consequently banned.
Under the current regime, an active substance that is deemed as “hazardous” cannot be used in a crop protection product. This also applies to endocrine disrupting chemicals, regardless of potency of effect and evidence of harm.
The actual number of losses is difficult to determine, but according to a recent study by the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (AHDB), the new criteria could cost UK agriculture over £905 million of lost yield.
Speaking in the European Parliament’s debate on endocrine disruption, McIntyre said: 'The Commission was right to launch an impact assessment into the different options for the definition of endocrine disrupting chemicals, but we now need to ensure the final definition is proportionate and based on the science.'
McIntyre said that not all substances that have an effect on the endocrine system are endocrine disruptors.“For example, many plant-based foods, such as caffeine in coffee, interact with the hormonal system without leading to disruption or harm. Endocrine active substances should be treated like most other substances of potential concern, and be subject to risk assessment in which both the hazard and exposure are considered,' she said.
'Rising worldwide demand for food means that Europe's farmers are going to have to significantly produce more food in the years ahead. While over 840 million people in the world do not have enough to eat, Europe, with its favourable soils and climate, surely has a moral obligation to optimise agricultural output.
“But this cannot be realised if our farmers do not have access to an adequate range of crop protection products.'
No comments yet