Like hamsters on a wheel, European countries continue to go around and around the authorization to use glyphosate, the active principle of the group of herbicides most used in the world. The environmental and health effects of this substance continue to be the subject of discrepancies. The technical committee for plants, animals, food and seeds of the European Commission is debating today a proposal in which it is proposed to extend its commercialization for ten years. However, it cannot be ruled out that the issue will not be put to a vote in order not to deepen the internal divisions, with which the wheel can continue to make more rounds in new meetings.
In any case, the decision must be imminent, since the current authorization ends on December 15, and if there are no conditions for a majority to approve the new regulation (55% of the countries that add up to 65 % of the population), the authorization could be extended by one year (as happened in 2022).
Glyphosate has been listed as “probably carcinogenic to humans” by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a subsidiary of the World Health Organization (WHO). However, this decision does not entail any prohibition on its use, since it is a matter that corresponds to the state and community authorities.
The Commission intends to extend the authorization of this controversial product until 2033 with the endorsement of the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA), which sees no evidence of toxicity. In the same way, a report from the Ministry of Health – which marks the Spanish position – indicates that, in the area of ??its competences, “there are no critical areas of concern”, which is why it “supports the renewal ” of the authorization to glyphosate for ten years. Despite the uncertainties, he does not believe there is a risk of potential genotoxicity. A common position of the 27 (these ten years of extension) could be given if countries are left free to impose their own restrictions at the national level or if new evidence emerges that forces a reevaluation of the substance this decade.
The position of France, the main agricultural power of the EU and the first beneficiary of the common agricultural policy, will be decisive. “We have one goal: get rid of glyphosate” and “we want it to be effective and operational as long as there is an alternative to glyphosate,” French Government spokesman Olivier Véran said on Wednesday, although he did not specify what his vote.
France opposed the renewal of the 2017 permit, and President Emmanuel Macron himself went so far as to announce a total ban by the end of 2020. But he later admitted “the mistake” of believing that France would be able to do without of this herbicide alone. The proposed ban was nuanced and would only apply in specific cases.
This herbicide destroys a wide variety of plants, and its effectiveness and low cost have made it a successful product. Eliminates all weeds that compete with the crop, making harvests easier. Since 1996, Monsanto has been marketing genetically modified seeds (GMOs) to be resistant to glyphosate: farmers can spray it without fear of damaging future crops. Roundup seeds (mainly soybeans and corn) have been criticized, especially in Europe, because they reinforce the dependence on intensive crops with a model that favors the risk of a spread of GMO organisms and the long-term impacts of which they are unknown
