Letters
Call to implement Better Regulation principles in EU action on Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals
We are contacting you about Better Regulation issues in the EU’s policy on Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals. First, we would like to express our appreciation to the European Commission for its stated commitment to “listen to the European Parliament, listen to all Member States, and listen to the people” (1). The harm caused by endocrine disrupting chemicals (“EDCs”) on EU citizens’ health and their environment is one of these “big problems” that the European Commission has been mandated to tackle as early as 1998 (2).
Criteria on Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals - EU Member States unprotected
Monday 14th of November 2016
To: Health, Environment and Agriculture Ministers
Dear Minister,
Ahead of the discussions on the criteria for endocrine disrupting chemicals in the Standing Committee of Food Animals Food and Feed on 18.11.2016 under the Pesticides 1107/2009 and Biocides 528/2012 Regulations, we would to like to share our concerns regarding the revised draft Commission proposal.
EU Health Commissioner chooses to protect the industry profit rather than the Health of Europeans and the environment
Dear Minister,
The Health Directory for the European Commission has failed to fulfil its duty to produce scientific criteria for endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) that will protect the health of humans, animals and the environment from exposure to these chemicals.
Phase out of the pesticide glyphosate
Dear Commission President Juncker,
Dear Health Commissioner Andriukaitis,
We – the thirty one signatories of European environmental, health, trade union, consumer protection and medical organisations – call on you to stop any further prolongation of the authorization of Glyphosate for the following reasons.
Pan International letter to the JMPR for the assessment of glyphosate
Dear experts of the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues,
We are writing to you on the behalf of Pesticide Action Network International, a global network of civil society organisations that work to replace hazardous pesticides with environmentally friendly alternatives[1]. With this letter we would like to express our concerns about the possible weaknesses of the regulatory assessment of glyphosate in relation to its carcinogenic potential that may be putting human health and the environment at risk.
European NGOs call on the MEPs to support the plenary voting against glyphosate re-approval
Dear Member of the European Parliament,
On April 13th, you will vote on the Environment Committee’s objection to the Commission’s proposal to renew the EU license for glyphosate, the active ingredient in many widely used herbicides.
Letter to Commissioner Andriukaitis on his request for the confidential industry studies for glyphosate
Dear Commissioner Andriukaitis,
We refer to your letter of 4 April 2016 to Richard P. Garnett of Monsanto Europe, Chairman of the Glyphosate Task Force, an industry consortium pressing for continued approval of glyphosate. In this letter you requested the full publication of confidential industry studies on the potential carcinogenicity of glyphosate, an active ingredient in many widely used herbicides.
Letter calling national representatives on pesticides to vote against glyphosate re-approval in the EU
Dear Sir or Madam,
Last Tuesday, 8th of March, the Standing Committee on Plant Animal Food and Feed (PAFF) postponed the vote on the re-approval of glyphosate in the EU. Unable to reach a qualified majority voting (QMV), the European Commission (EC) asked the Member States to give their suggestions by 18th of March.
Model Letter for national action against the renewal of glyphosate in EU
26 February 2016
Dear XXX
I am writing to you on behalf of XXX to express our concern about the possible re-approval of the controversial active substance glyphosate in Europe, used in herbicide products, for a period of fifteen years.
Last year, glyphosate was classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World Health Organisation (WHO), as a “probable human carcinogen”, following a thorough analysis performed by 17 independent experts using publicly available studies[1].