Concerning the Public Consultation on the criteria to identify Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (EDCs) in the EU biocides and pesticides legislation, and the Impact Assessment to be performed by the Commission during 2015, ChemSec is worried that the information spread by some industry parties is exaggerated and lacks description of the innovation potential within European companies.
– It is important to scrutinize the generally skewed numbers presented by the pesticide industry associations and its allies and the lack of vision for solutions other than replacing one hazardous chemical with another, says Theresa Kjell, ChemSec Policy Advicor.
ChemSec see the following aspects particularly worrying and urge that these will be addressed during the impact assessment:
• The costs for society must be thoroughly evaluated and considered to be at least equally important as the costs for industry. Pesticide industry associations also tend to exaggerate the costs for changing to non-ED alternatives, this must also be taken into account.
• The perspective of downstream users of chemicals should be thoroughly considered and reflected
• The innovation potential and positive effects from stricter regulations on innovation should not be underestimated
• Alternatives must be looked at in a broad sense
Earlier this week ChemSec released the report “Cry Wolf”, showing how companies and trade organisations frequently tell politicians that stricter environmental legislation would harm the economy significantly, but the Cry Wolf report shows such claims have repeatedly been proven wrong.