Press releases
Wild bees are in decline across the EU and to date, they still remain unprotected against pesticides. While the pesticide regulation claims that no unacceptable harm on the environment is accepted, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) just published an analysis supporting more harm to Wild Bees, through exposure to toxic pesticides.
Since the EU finally opened its Courts for environmental challenges to NGOs and individuals to question any EU decision concerning environmental law, PAN Europe has just launched two legal actions: one on the illegal presence on the market of non-evaluated pesticides and the other on the reapproval of highly problematic Cypermethrin.
Today, civil society and indigenous people organizations delivered more than 187,300 petition signatures from over 107 countries to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Director-General Qu Dongyu, demanding that the FAO ends its partnership with CropLife International, an association representing the world’s largest agrochemical companies. The global petition was facilitated by Pesticide Action Network (PAN), Friends of the Earth, SumOfUs, and the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL).
Today, the EFSA is holding a meeting to expose its methodology on the assessment of 17 derogations provided by 11 Member States for the use of neonicotinoids on sugar beets in 2020 and 2021. Pollinis and PAN Europe will boycott the event as they consider the EFSA has consciously carried out a non-scientific piece of work, far from the ‘scientific excellence’ it promotes.
January 2022 onwards, France will have a decisive capacity to take concrete actions to address EU-wide the use of pesticides and other chemical pollutants. NGOs, therefore, call on France to make impactful use of this 6-month leadership.
Today, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published its assessment of derogations[1] provided by EU Member States for the use of neonicotinoid insecticides on sugar beet in 2020. The EFSA has green lit all 17 derogations. The agency has once more done a very poor job and has confirmed its limitations in terms of scientific expertise.
DG Sante is proposing a new approach to define the level of protection of nature against pesticides: the Specific Protection Goals (SPG) for Ecosystem Services. This approach is supported by the chemical industry and, in particular, by professor Maltby (UK)[1]. Without any request for Pr. Maltby’s declaration of interest, DG Sante invited her as the main independent expert in a workshop dedicated to SPGs. Ms.
EU Member States have voted last week for the re-approval of flumioxazin and cypermethrin, two endocrine disrupting and bee-toxic pesticides. This re-approval is in total contradiction with the European Green Deal that reinforced the precautionary principle, biodiversity protection, and the will of the Commission to phase out endocrine disruptors. PAN Europe considers going to court.
On 21 and 22 October, the national representatives of the PAFF committee are invited to vote on the renewal of two active substances with well-known disruptive properties (Cypermethrin) or highly suspected (Flumioxazin).
Salome Roynel, campaigner at PAN Europe said, “These two substances clearly do not meet the approval criteria to remain on the European market. With these two proposals, DG SANTE is flouting both its legal and political commitments.”
During a meeting[1] on the impact assessment linked to the revision of the Sustainable Use of Pesticides Directive (SUD), the consultant has disclosed the different options, as proposed by DG Sante. The obvious lack of ambition is in complete contradiction with the objectives of the Farm-to-Fork and the Biodiversity Strategies. The approach taken will prevent the objective of 50% cut in pesticides by 2030 from becoming a reality.
