The member states of the European Union will today decide on the future of glyphosate, a widely used weed killer in agriculture. Outgoing Minister Piet Adema (Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality) will abstain from voting on behalf of the Netherlands.
That is against the sore leg of a majority of the House of Representatives, which wants the outgoing cabinet to vote against allowing glyphosate.
Opinions are divided about glyphosate, but what makes this drug so controversial?
Glyphosate is the active substance in many pesticides and herbicides and has been permitted in the EU since 2002. It was developed by the American company Monsanto, which marketed it under the name RoundUp. In addition to weed control, it is also used to kill perennial root weeds so that new crops are not affected.
There is a lot of discussion worldwide about the danger of glyphosate to humans. The European and American authorities believe that the substance is not carcinogenic, but the World Health Organization (WHO), among others, doubts this. Research is still being done.
Plant protection products have been subject to a double authorization procedure since 1993. The active substance must first be approved at EU level. Member States can then authorize plant protection products containing such an approved substance. Glyphosate was first approved at EU level on July 1, 2002.
Admission is done by the European Commission. And that committee, like the European Food Watchdog (EFSA), does not see sufficient evidence to ban the drug. According to them, there would be no unacceptable risks. Today, the EU member states will decide in Brussels whether glyphosate will be permitted for another ten years.
Although the drug has not yet been banned by European authorities, environmental organizations are calling for caution with glyphosate.
When asked, Fred Prak, press officer of Natuurmonumenten, says that his association is not involved in research into this drug, but that reporting is being closely monitored. “In principle, we base ourselves on the precautionary principle. If you cannot rule out that a product has a negative effect on biodiversity and the number of insects, you should not use it. In any case, we see a decline in biodiversity and the number of insects .”
The agricultural organization LTO also says that agriculture and horticulture are trying to reduce use by developing and applying alternatives. On the LTO website, the use of the product is safe for humans, animals and the environment according to the regulations, but “when it comes to weed control, farmers and gardeners are making careful considerations and alternatives are being actively sought.”
According to BBB chairman Caroline van der Plas, farmers ‘just need’ glyphosate. She fears that a ban will have ‘disastrous consequences’ for food security, among other things.
Minister Adema announced in a letter to the House of Representatives on Tuesday that the Netherlands will abstain from voting today. He believes that both a vote for and against is insufficiently justified. Based on scientific studies, the EFSA states that there are ‘no risks’ associated with a 10-year extension of the use of glyphosate.
Yesterday, the House of Representatives made a final attempt to call on the cabinet to vote against the extension of the use of glyphosate. D66’s motion was supported by the SP, GroenLinks, PvdA, PVV, Party for the Animals, Volt, DENK, Den Haan faction.
In their new motion, the MPs emphasize that there is scientific evidence that there is a link between glyphosate and Parkinson’s disease and that science warns of a Parkinson’s pandemic.
The EFSA, an important advisor to the cabinet, does not specifically test for Parkinson’s. It is therefore “up to politicians” to “weigh the risks indicated by science and act with precaution”, the petitioners say.
A motion by BBB calling on the cabinet to vote in favor of extension in the EU was rejected. However, there was still a lot of support for this motion from VVD, CDA, FVD, SGP, JA21, Groep Van Haga.
The Drents-Overijsselse Delta Water Board (WDODelta) fined three farmers last year for using the pesticide RoundUp to spray a ditch slope. This is not permitted, because the water board wants to prevent glyphosate from ending up in the water. The water board also issued fifty warnings.
WDODelta advocates using a cultivation-free strip. This means that a strip of land is kept free between the plot and the water, on which spraying and fertilization is not allowed.
Wijnand Sukkel of Wageningen University & Research (WUR) previously indicated that glyphosate is widely used in Drenthe in the Peat Colonies. “They have a lot of trouble with weeds there. Just before the crop emerges, the glyphosate is sprayed over it. This way you don’t hit the crop, but you do get rid of the weeds.”