Parliament's Environment Committee stands firm on REACH
The European Parliament's Environment Committee stood firm at its second reading of the REACH proposal on chemicals regulation, adopting a tougher stance than the Council. MEPs called for the most hazardous substances to be substituted wherever possible, emphasised the duty of care principle and the need to promote alternatives to animal testing. The committee's vote has received mixed reactions. MEPs called for substances that cause cancer, reproduction problems or persistent human health problems should not be authorised unless three conditions are met: if suitable alternative substances or technologies do not exist; if it is demonstrated that social or economic advantages outweigh the risks; and if the risk is 'adequately controlled'. The Environment Committee also sought to reduce the impact that the legislation is likely to have on animal testing by stating that REACH should promote tests that do not use animals. MEPs also stressed that the European Commission, the EU Member States and industry should all allocate more resources to devising, validating and adopting tests that do not involve animals. They also asked that the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods - part of the Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) - be consulted on testing proposals that include animals. REACH has roughly divided MEPs, with many Greens, Liberals and Socialists supporting the Environment Committee's stance, and the EPP-ED group arguing against the 'red tape' that it believes the other groups wish to introduce. For this reason, the adoption of the committee's report by the Parliament as a whole is not guaranteed. Orgalime, which represents 35 trade federations and some 130,000 companies, has criticised the committee's decisions, saying that some provisions are unworkable in areas 'which are key for the competitiveness of our industries that act on highly competitive global markets'. The organisation further states: 'such a complex and ambitious piece of legislation as REACH should underpin rather than hinder the innovation capacity of the EU's engineering industries.' UEAPME, representing small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), was slightly more positive, welcoming clarifications on cost sharing and Parliamentarians' backing of proposals facilitating the implementation of REACH by small businesses. Other requirements on notification and chemical safety reports for substances produced in smaller quantities were less welcome. According to UEAPME Director for Environment Policy, Guido Lena, these requirements 'invalidate all efforts made towards assisting SMEs in implementing REACH'. WWF has responded positively to the vote, saying: 'Environmental, women's, health and consumer organisations see today's Environment Committee vote on the new EU chemicals law (REACH) as a vital step towards protecting health and the environment from chemical contamination.' The Parliament is expected to vote on REACH on 14 November, and the result is then likely to be put to the Competitiveness Council on 4 December.