The Twenty-Seven failed to agree on Friday October 13 on Brussels’ proposal to renew the authorization of glyphosate for ten years, France having notably abstained, which will lead to a new vote in November on the fate of the controversial herbicide.
The European Commission proposed renewing its green light until December 2033 after a report from a European regulator finding that the level of risk did not justify banning the substance. During a closed-door vote by representatives of the Member States within the framework of a technical committee, the qualified majority required to validate the text – i.e. 15 States out of 27, representing at least 65% of the European population – did not reach not been achieved, announced the European executive.
If many countries in southern and eastern Europe support the re-authorization, Austria and Luxembourg had expressed their desire to vote against. And, as a result of the divisions in the ruling coalition in Berlin, Germany announced “not accepting” the extension of the authorization. Finally, Belgium and the Netherlands had warned that they would abstain.
Divergences
France, for its part, decided to abstain. “We have said, from the start, that the Commission’s proposal as it is formulated, ten years without conditions, did not correspond to the trajectory” decided by France for several years, which is to “restrict the uses there where there are alternatives to ensure that there is less glyphosate”, a controversial herbicide, justified the Minister of Agriculture, Marc Fesneau.
The European Commission proposed in September to renew its green light until December 2033, under certain conditions, after a report from a European regulator estimating that the level of risk did not justify banning the substance. This proposal has been discussed since Thursday within the framework of a technical committee bringing together representatives of the Member States.
“Many member states have welcomed the proposal” and if some countries have “recommended specific additional restrictions”, this idea is not supported by “a large majority”, assured last week the Commissioner for Health, Stella Kyriakides. However, the differences displayed by Europeans are numerous.
Glyphosate, the active substance in several herbicides – including Monsanto’s Roundup, widely used around the world – was classified in 2015 as a “probable carcinogen” by the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization ( WHO). Conclusions confirmed in 2021 in France by the National Institute of Health and Medical Research (Inserm).
Another vote in November
Conversely, in July, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) assured that it had not identified any “critical areas of concern” in humans, animals and the environment that could prevent the authorization of the herbicide. It only noted “a high long-term risk in mammals” for half of the proposed uses and recognized that a lack of data prevented any definitive analysis.
To take this into account, Brussels proposed some safeguards, in particular with the establishment “by default” of “buffer strips” of five to ten meters and equipment drastically reducing “spray drift”, while the use for desiccation (spreading to dry a crop before harvest) would be prohibited.
The current authorization of glyphosate in the EU, renewed in 2017 for five years and then extended for another year, expires on December 15. As no qualified majority in favor of the text emerged on Friday, another vote will take place in November. If there is still not a sufficient majority to support the proposal, the Commission can then decide alone to extend the authorization – only a qualified majority of states opposed to the text can block it.
If the active substance is approved at EU level, each State will remain responsible for authorizing products containing glyphosate, setting the rules for use according to crops, climatic conditions and geographical specificities. Brussels asks them to assess the potential effects on the environment and biodiversity, “co-formulants” (components of herbicides) and the exposure of consumers to “residues”, while ensuring the protection of groundwater or surface: States could thus restrict the use of glyphosate, but only within the framework of the criteria set by the EU.