On the Environment Council meeting 4 March a statement was made from all EU Environmental Ministers, calling for the Commission to urgently act on EDCs.
The statement underscores the importance to comply with the EU court judgement and its legal obligations, in order to prevent any further delay in developing science-based criteria.
– We are glad that also the Council takes a clear position regarding the importance to regulate EDCs, says Dr Anna Lennquist, ChemSec toxicologist.
At the press conference after the meeting Commissioner Vytensis Andriukaitis again said that the ambition from the Commission is to present draft criteria before summer. These criteria should be based on the WHO definition and on “all scientific reports” and the almost finalised impact assessment.
When asked about adopting the draft criteria from 2013, which has been suggested by many groups, including the Greens of the EU Parliament, Andriukaitis said that those criteria were only draft and much disputed. He also said that the Commission has asked the German authority BfR to arrange a scientific meeting the 11:th of April from which he expects a presentation of a common scientific view.
Very surprisingly, Commissioner Karminu Vella stepped in after this and explained that potency will “of course” be an element of the proposed criteria.
– We do not ban substances, we ban the use of substances in the EU. It is only logical, he said.
Andriukaitis however again emphasised that he could not reveal details and that there are still a few months left of the work. He also invited interested experts from the Member States and Parliament to have a say.
– I do hope that this was just the opinion of Vella and that the Commission will actually, as Andriukaitis sais, look at all scientific reports. If doing so it should be obvious that potency should not be part of the scientific criteria. But what is still confusing is why the Commission keep claiming the need for an impact assessment to propose scientific criteria. This is mixing science and policy in an inaccurate way, says Dr Lennquist.