Casa breaks ranks with EPP on pesticide ban that fails to pass muster

A Commission proposal to cut down on pesticide use has been defeated after MEPs in plenary amended the original law as presented by the environment committee.

Originally the position was to reduce the use and risk of all chemical pesticides by at least 50% by 2030, adopted at committee stage against opposition from the centre-right EPP.

MEPs wanted to ban the use of chemical pesticides, except those authorised for organic farming and biological control, in sensitive areas, and within a five-metre buffer zone, such as all urban green spaces including parks, playgrounds, sports grounds, public paths, as well as Natura 2000 areas.

Austrian MEP Sarah Wiener (Greens) said the discussion in committee had been “ideologically charged and industry-dominated”. But she had hoped that practical solutions had been found on sensitive areas where member states can make exceptions if needed.

But eventually the proposal was amended by MEPs in plenary, which ultimately led to a majority of members – mainly socialists, greens and left, but also a slim minority of EPP members that included Nationalist MEP David Casa – to reject the law as amended.

207 MEPs, mainly EPP and Renew members, supported the amended proposal and 121 abstained. Labour MEP Cyrus Engerer voted against the amended law, while Alex Agius Saliba and Alfred Sant abstained.

With this vote, Parliament has effectively rejected the Commission proposal and closed its first reading. The Council still has to decide on its own position on the proposal to determine whether it is definitively rejected or returns to Parliament for a second reading.

The widespread use of synthetic pesticides represents a significant burden on the health of European citizens, and farmers in particular.

Synthetic pesticides are also the main cause of the disappearance of birds and insects in the European countryside and are largely responsible for polluting our waters with toxic substances.  

The EP’s vote was staunchly criticised by IFOAM Organics Europe, which represents organic farmers.

“The European Parliament’s watering down and rejection of the pesticides reduction regulation is shameful. Politicians who claim that they defend farmers by refusing to reduce synthetic pesticides fool themselves and the public. Policymakers’ lack of political will to take action to reduce pesticides makes it even more obvious that developing organic farming is the best way to protect people’s health and nature from toxic pesticides”, said Eric Gall, deputy director of IFOAM Organics Europe. 

Gall said that organic farming is the proof that it is possible to produce sufficient quality food without relying on synthetic pesticides.

“The organic approach to plant health care is mostly based on preventive and indirect agronomic measures, such as crop rotations, to manage pests and diseases, which can be complemented when needed for some crops with biocontrol solutions such as natural substances, most of which easily degrade in the environment.”  

With the pesticide reduction law SUR voted down and referred back to the environment committee, it means negotiations cannot be concluded in this term.

Transparency watchdog Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO), which published a report this week, exposing the latest lobby attempts to derail this law, said lobbies had attacked the pesticide reduction target since the beginning: from misleading ‘impact studies’ leading creating delay, to attempts to water down the law in every way possible.

CEO said that a majority of MEPs had bought into a years-long, misleading campaign set up by the pesticide industry, notably Croplife Europe with its members Bayer, BASF, Syngenta and Corteva.

“The SUR was one key law that was highly needed to save ecosystems that our food security and indeed survival is dependent on. 6.000 scientists expressed their support for both the pesticide reduction law and the Nature Restoration Law as essential for food security in the long term,” CEO said.

“This is a highly irresponsible move, now already celebrated by EPP MEPs like Peter Liese who clearly could not care less about a future for next generations. The Conservative group was aided by numerous members of the Liberals (Renew) in this scandalous decision. Rapporteur Sarah Wiener, who had made a brave attempt to save this law, testified after the vote how she was threatened and intimidated while negotiating this law,” CEO said.