Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-11-15-Speech-4-130"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011115.5.4-130"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Both the White Paper from the Commission and the report drawn up by Mrs Schorling are flawed, the latter fundamentally.
The report is based on the general assumption that there are a large number of chemicals that pose a threat to both human health and the environment, and ignores the positive health and environmental benefits to society arising form many man-made chemicals.
Paragraph 16 of the report seeks to extend the REACH system to cover chemicals manufactured in volumes of under one tonne per year; this will lead to a possible twenty-fold increase in the number of chemicals requiring authorisation, and an impossible workload for those given that task. The scope should be limited to those chemicals produced in volumes over one tonne, as set out in the White Paper.
Paragraph 38, which sets out which substance shall be classified as being of very high concern, is too broad for any authorisation system to be workable. The definition should be restricted to CMR (categories 1 and 2), and POP substances, as defined in the Stockholm Convention.
The provisions of the report will lead to an unacceptable increase in the amount of tests carried out on animals. A report by the Institute of Environmental Health in the United Kingdom, estimated that 12.8 million animals will be needed in the testing of 30,000 chemicals. These figures have been echoed by many European animal welfare groups. The rapporteur recognises this problem, but places too much faith in the availability and acceptability of non-animal tests.
Furthermore, to gather "base-set" level of information simply for chemicals manufactured in volumes over one tonne per year will take approximately 36 years alone, according to the IEH report. The timescale set out in the report (2008) is thus completely unrealistic.
The European chemicals industry has been consulted far too late, and its attempts at self-regulation (e.g. Product Stewardship, the Long Range Research Initiative and "Confidence in Chemicals") have been completely ignored by the rapporteur in this report. Since the proposals in the report look likely to increase the administrative burden on the industry (particularly SMEs), as well as dent its competitiveness on a global scale, this is a serious oversight."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples