Council and Parliament REACH a deal on Chemicals
At the informal High-Level Trilogue on REACH, held late Thursday evening on 30 November, representatives of the European Parliament Mr. Guido Sacconi and Mr. Karl-Heinz Florenz reached a deal with the Council of Ministers, as represented by the Finnish Chairman-in–office, Ms. Vaskunlahti. The agreement, denounced by European NGOs as “a deal too far” will be voted upon by the entire Parliament at its plenary session in December.
After the rejection of the Council proposals by Parliament rapporteur Sacconi
at the last formally scheduled Trialogue on 27 November, intensive negotiations
commenced to avoid the institutions moving into the ‘conciliation’
procedure. Council presented a new package on 29 November which approached
the Recommendation for Second Reading adopted in the Parliament’s
Environment Committee on 10 October. However in a strange turn of events,
the conservative group of the European Parliament, the EPP, then exerted
pressure on the rapporteur to water down the proposal even further. This
renders the final result a pale version of the original expectations on
REACH, especially in terms of information provided to professional users
of chemicals and consumers; in terms of substitution of the most hazardous
substances; and in terms of producer responsibility for dangerous chemicals.
According to the agreed proposal, many Substances of Very High Concern,
such as chemicals causing cancer, that are toxic to reproduction, or hormone
disrupting, to name a few, will stay on the market and used in consumer
products, in spite of the availability of suitable, safer alternatives.
The proposal largely reflects the Council Common position of December 2005
(see Chemsec analysis), whereby a manufacturer of a Substance of Very High
Concern can get authorisation for the continued use on the grounds of “adequate
control” of the substance.
The many improvements to the Common Position recommended by the Parliament’s Environment Committee, such as mandatory substitution when a suitable alternative is available, a more stream-lined authorisation process, increased access to information etc, were largely removed from the deal.
On the communication of information on substances in articles, the deal confirms the Common Position stating that only information on the presence of a Substance of Very High Concern shall be provided to the recipient of the article. This does not cover the numerous dangerous substances wanted by the Parliament, such as allergens, sensitizers and other toxic substances. Only after 12 years will a review be carried out to assess whether to cover additional dangerous substances.
The Council, criticised by many as not presenting the Parliament with any real compromise during the course of the negotiations, made a few concessions at the last minute deal. These improvements were however eliminated by specific demands from the EPP.
According to these demands, hormone disrupting substances will not have to be substituted, even when suitable alternatives are available (Article 59.3), but may be permitted under the ‘adequate control’ rationale. Information made available on dangerous chemicals will further be reduced on grounds of confidentiality (Article 118), hampering data-sharing on animal tests and research on substitution possibilities and undermining the public’s access to information.
Regarding substitution plans, seen as crucial by many, and advocated by Mr. Sacconi throughout the process, a mere smoke-screen clause was adopted (Article 61). According to this, a substitution plan will only be submitted if the applicant’s own analysis identifies a safer alternative to the very Substance of Very High Concern for which the applicant is requesting an authorisation! According to these provisions, third party in-put is not guaranteed.
The deal is expected to be approved by a majority of Members, consisting of Conservatives and Social Democrats at the European Parliament Plenary Session on 13 December.
Downloads
Download the REACH text (pdf, 1,7 MB)
Facts and controversial issues 2006 (ppt, 1,26MB)
Report:
Implications of
REACH for developing countries
(pdf, 1MB)
Les implications de REACH pour
les pays en développement
(pdf, 1,4MB)