A dozen states of the European Union want to prevent transparency on the quantities of products used.
by
Far from being always fortuitous, ignorance is sometimes the result of strategic choices. This is what two non-governmental organizations (NGOs) suggest in a report released Wednesday 2 February on the draft reform of European agricultural statistics. On the basis of internal documents to the deliberations of the European Council, Pesticide Action Network (PAN) and the Austrian branch of Friends of Earth denounce the desire of a dozen member states of “torpedo” the Legislative Project Saio (Statistics ON Agricultural Inputs and Outputs) launched a year ago by the European Commission. And thus seek to remain deliberately in ignorance of the actual uses of pesticides on the old continent.
For the authors of the report, the amendments requested by the Council would interfere with the implementation of the “Farm to Fork” or “F2F” strategy (“from the farm to the range”), the agricultural component of the Green Deal or European green pact. These amendments will be debated in the coming days between the Council, the Commission and the Parliament.
“The requirements of the Council return to maintain a high uncertainty about the reality of pesticide uses in the different countries of the European Union, explains Martin Dermin (PAN), co-author of the report. To the point that it would be impossible Following the evolution of pesticide uses, while one of the key objectives of the Green Covenant is the 50% reduction in the use and risk of these products by 2030. “
“Characterize pollution at the local level”
In particular, the initial proposal of Brussels provided an annual update of the uses of agrotoxic, with transmission by each exploitation of its usage data: sort of products spread, quantities, surfaces and types of treated culture, etc. . “This information is crucial if you want to adapt and observe, year after year, the agricultural sectors or regions that encounter more difficulties than others to modify practices, adds Mr. Dermine. Or the Council does not Do not want these data to be made available each year, but every five years! ”
Other amendments requested by the Council go in the same direction, according to the report: Rejection of the compulsory and harmonized collection of data, which could allow comparisons of use between the Member States, rejection of the requirement of A transmission of data in electronic format, request a feasibility study guaranteeing that the new data collection standards will not represent an administrative and economic burden. Similarly, adds the report, the Council’s amendments maintain a blur on the possibility of public access to these data. An important point, because the reform desired by the Commission would incubizely enable individuals or local authorities to accurately learn about pesticide spreads at the microinterritory scale.
You have 47.64% of this article to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.