The way pesticides such as glyphosate are assessed must change. Experts argued for this during a discussion in the House of Representatives.
According to the experts, the current assessment framework does not provide enough room to really properly assess substances. The body in the Netherlands that assesses pesticides is the Board for the Authorization of Plant Protection Products and Biocides (Ctgb).
Last week, the Ctgb was discredited because the television program Zembla concluded from internal documents that risks sometimes disappeared from policy documents. Zembla conducted research into the case surrounding grower Joling from Dwingeloo, who has a lily field near Boterveen. Local residents successfully took him to court earlier this year to stop the use of pesticides.
After the ruling, Joling appealed to the high court and partially got his way. He may continue to use four types of pesticides on his field in Boterveen, but the other products will remain banned for the rest of the year.
However, according to Zembla, not all risks of pesticides are known. Zembla reports that the Ctgb has concealed the risks that local residents run when using these substances. Ctgb director Ingrid Becks-Vermeer acknowledges that the European assessment framework can be improved, but emphasizes that her organization feels very responsible for identifying risks.
One of the substances the experts considered was glyphosate. The European Commission wants to authorize this drug for another ten years. Unless a large majority of EU countries oppose this, the controversial herbicide may be used until at least 2033.
The experts did not agree on the danger of this drug. Becks-Vermeer sees no reason to worry about this pesticide, but Professor Bas Bloem of Radboud university medical center says that “there is definite evidence that glyphosate is toxic.” He points to studies that indicate a possible link between glyphosate and Parkinson’s disease.