Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-01-18-Speech-3-358-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120118.26.3-358-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, I would like to use the whole of my speaking time at the beginning, because I have another important meeting that conflicts with this and we are running rather late. I hope you will allow that.
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, after more than two years of very intensive debates and negotiations, we are now able to present a fully developed document regarding a regulation concerning the authorisation of biocidal products in the European Union. Following the rules for chemicals in the REACH Regulation and the Regulation on Pesticides, we are for the first time also regulating the authorisation and placing on the market of biocidal products. In the third trialogue with the Polish Presidency on 17 November, we were able to reach an agreement at second reading. Today, we can say that we – the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission – have succeeded in making major improvements in respect of environmental protection and consumer protection, but also in terms of providing for a simple and faster European authorisation procedure. At this point, I would like to thank everyone involved – my fellow Members, colleagues in the Commission and also the Council – most sincerely for their excellent cooperation and for their readiness to compromise and work together.
Biocidal products are essential for a high standard of health and hygiene in our society. Disinfectants and pesticides protect against dangerous diseases and are used to protect highly perishable materials. Biocidal products are, however, also used as preservatives, for example in paints or wood preservatives or as sealants for automobile lacquer or to treat furniture and fabrics. Thus, we come across biocidal products very often in our day-to-day lives. They have an effect and thus also a side-effect that can be dangerous to people. The 1998 Biocidal Products Directive contained no harmonisation of active substance testing and product authorisation between the individual Member States, and lengthy coordination procedures among different national authorities made authorisation almost impossible.
However, we also need regulation in this area on account of the incidents that have occurred in recent years where sofas and boots imported from Asia have resulted in skin irritation and poisonings. In future, only goods that have been treated with biocidal products authorised in the EU may be placed on the market here. Our aim is to find a balance between benefit and risk. We have laid down stringent exclusion criteria for active substances and products. However, we are aware that the risk associated with not using biocidal products also needs to be taken into consideration. Where there is a risk of danger, it must also be possible to have exceptions. These are clearly defined and apply only if an active substance is necessary for reasons of public health or animal health or if not authorising the biocidal product would have negative consequences for society.
Consumers want to be informed. Thus, there will be labelling requirements in respect of the name of the active substance and its biocidal properties, relevant instructions for use and indications of danger and any content of active substances in nanoform.
Our aim is to achieve faster EU-wide authorisation of products and active substances. For Parliament, this can be best achieved by means of the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). In order to avoid a back-log of applications or authorisations, we have agreed on the introduction of the Community authorisation system in stages. Products with low-risk active substances are to be authorised EU-wide by the ECHA by means of a simplified procedure. We want a uniform internal market. Therefore, Member States can only refuse an authorisation on their sovereign territory in clearly defined circumstances and with the consent of the Commission.
The authorisation procedure must be efficient and simple. If it is just the colour or the aroma that is to be changed, then we do not need to go through this whole authorisation procedure again. Studies must be made available under controlled conditions in order to avoid the duplication of animal experiments, but also, ultimately, to share the costs. Only if research companies have the opportunity to recoup the high costs of testing active substances and getting products authorised through the marketing of the products will they also be prepared to invest in future. All users must be fully aware of the effects of biocidal products, in particular those who use these products in a professional capacity on behalf of others. If I try and get rid of lice on my head myself, that is at my own risk and I am doing it for myself. However, if I go to a professional hairdresser for this purpose and pay him for it, then I expect him to have had the best possible training and the risk-free use of the products to ultimately be guaranteed. Thus, his training must include information on the use of biocidal products. The same applies to pest controllers, car body painters, painters and joiners.
As Parliament, we will not lose sight of the demand for a directive for the sustainable use of biocidal products – just as we will monitor the implementation of the regulation, which is now the responsibility of the Member States. We are all aware that this sort of regulation is not set in stone. There are sure to be more amendments and additions over time. Even now, some issues remain unresolved. For example, the demand for the delegated acts that give Parliament more rights of scrutiny in accordance with the new Treaty of Lisbon. It is certainly the case that political decisions are often involved in the implementation, too. It is important that Parliament be involved in the decision making when it comes to setting fees and with regard to the authorisation of active substances. In these areas, we have not been granted the involvement that we are entitled to and therefore we will make it clear in a written statement that this does not set a precedent for future legislative acts. Democracy requires the participation of elected representatives, in this case the participation of the European Parliament. I would like once again to offer my sincere thanks to all of those who have contributed to this."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples