EU Parliament and Pesticides

Published in Notices

Who supported farmers, people and nature? If you care about human health and the environment, be informed and use your vote wisely!

Check out the voting records of the European Parliamentary Parties in key areas of concern using this invaluable information tool.

Ahead of the EU elections, PAN Europe, Friends of the Earth Europe, and Corporate Europe Observatory present a set of voting score cards by political group on the pesticide reduction proposal. These scorecards show which share of political groups supported a strong law, and which ones contributed to the ultimate abandonment of it.

The high use of pesticides is a major problem in our current food system, causing harm to and failing farmers, consumers, and future generations.

Recently, the EU introduced a new plan on pesticides – the Sustainable Use of Pesticides Regulation (SUR) – to cut pesticide use and risk by half in the EU and protect people and nature.

However, this proposal was severely watered down and ultimately failed to pass in the European Parliament. This means a failure to respond to the demand by over 1 million citizens for the EU to drastically reduce pesticide use and to support farmers in this transition.

Ahead of the EU elections, PAN Europe, Friends of the Earth Europe, and Corporate Europe Observatory today present a set of voting score cards by political groupon the pesticide reduction proposal. These scorecards show which share of political groups supported a strong law, and which ones contributed to the ultimate abandonment of it.

We chose six amendments on a variety of key aspects of the law, for which voting results per MEP were available. Score cards have also been produced for specific EU member states, showing voting results by national party: in Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Poland and Spain.

These are the results:

Using pesticides as a last resort

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a set of tools designed to reduce the use of pesticides by placing preventative agronomic measures at the heart of pest control, with pesticides used only as a very last resort. Although IPM is already mandatory through the current Directive (the Sustainable Use of Pesticides Directive) it has not been properly implemented by Member States. The new pesticide regulation aimed to further define and concretize crop-specific IPM rules, ensuring IPM is effectively applied. The following graph shows which percentage of the political groups supported - or not - these mandatory rules.

 Protecting nature areas and public spaces

The proposed new law would ban the use of pesticides in sensitive areas such as nature protected areas, public areas, parks and playgrounds. This measure aimed to better protect citizens, especially vulnerable groups, and our ecosystems. The following graph illustrates which percentage of the political groups supported this essential protection.

 

Protecting water sources

Pesticide pollution in water poses severe risks to public health and ecosystems, and incurs significant costs for society. The graph below shows which percentage of political groups voted in favor of measures to better protect water sources from pesticide contamination.

Making supermarkets also responsible for pesticides reduction

The responsibility of reducing pesticide use should be shared across the food supply chain, such as the food industry and supermarkets - certainly not on farmers alone. The following graph illustrates which percentage of political groups supported holding wholesalers, food producers and supermarkets also accountable for reducing pesticide use.

 

Providing yearly independent advice for farmers

In the last decades, publicly funded advisory systems for farmers have largely been replaced by private services linked to pesticide corporations, raising concerns about conflicts of interest. Regular independent advice is crucial to help break free from the pesticide industry’s grip and support farmers in adopting alternative practices. The following graph shows which percentages of MEPs were in support of farmers receiving at least once a year independent advice, instead of every three years.

Raising the ambition for the reduction of the most harmful pesticides

The graph below shows which MEPs voted against an amendment to set a higher reduction target for the most harmful pesticides, to 65% by 2030 instead of 50%. For these highly toxic pesticides, a 50% reduction is far from ambitious enough to protect citizens, farmers and nature, and a full phase out is necessary.

Conclusion

On all topics, the large majority or all of the christian-democratic EPP group, the conservative (to far-right) ECR and the far-right ID group voted consistently against the interests of people. These groups do not even support farmers getting regular independent advice on pesticides, or a higher reduction of the most harmful ones! Undermining urgently needed measures to reduce pesticide use harms the well-being of citizens, the health of our ecosystems and a long term perspective for farmers. As citizens across Europe head to the EU elections polls for, voters should be aware of how political groups (mis)represented their interests when given the opportunity.

Voters from Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Poland and Spain also have the possibility to check out how MEPs from their national parties voted.

Voters from all EU countries can also check how individual MEPs voted in an overview table.

AND DON'T FORGET THE BEES!

You can also check the voting records of MEPs in relation to the vital issue of bee protection: to choose the country click here, then you can check on that country's individual MEPs..

The record has been compiled by Bee Life Europe with these intentions: "As European citizens prepare to exercise their democratic rights at the polls (6-9 June 2024), it is crucial to recognise the significant role this election plays in shaping the future of environmental protection and the survival of bees. Our investigation into the voting patterns of Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) on bee-related matters has led to the creation of a practical tool to empower citizens to cast a bee-friendly vote, knowing that their choice can make a real difference.

This website analyses the voting records of MEPs on policies relevant to bees, pollinators, and beekeeping based on their behaviour over the last five years of the legislature. It shows how coherent they have been in protecting bees, the planet, and EU farming. In this 2024 elections, vote informed.

The newly developed tool is designed to simplify your understanding of MEPs' stance on bee issues. Based on their voting records, it assigns a score from 0 to 100 (0 being the most detrimental to bees and 100 the most beneficial). You can easily search for individual MEPs, explore voting trends by country, and even track the voting patterns of political groups at the European Parliament.

 
 
 
You are here: Home notices EU Parliament and Pesticides

Eco Environment News feeds

  • A huge cleanup effort has seen volunteers working to remove beads by hand and machine. They can only wait and see the extent of damage to wildlife and dune habitat

    Just past a scrum of dog walkers, about 40 people are urgently combing through the sand on hands and knees. Their task is to try to remove millions of peppercorn-sized black plastic biobeads from where they have settled in the sand. Beyond them, a seal carcass grins menacingly, teeth protruding from its rotting skull.

    Last week, an environmental disaster took place on Camber Sands beach, on what could turn out to be an unprecedented scale. Eastbourne Wastewater Treatment Works, owned by Southern Water, experienced a mechanical failure and spewed out millions of biobeads on to the Sussex coastline. Southern Water has since taken responsibility for the spill. Ironically, biobeads are used to clean wastewater – bacteria attach to their rough, crinkly surface and clean the water of contaminants.

    Camber Sands is one of England’s most popular beaches, with rare dune habitat

    Continue reading...

  • Sonia Guajajara tells Cop30 the rights of traditional communities must be maintained in the face of exploitation by the mining industry

    Countries must recognise the demarcation of Indigenous lands as a key component of tackling the climate crisis, and civil society must help in the defence of such lands against mining interests, Brazil’s minister for Indigenous peoples has said.

    Sonia Guajajara, a longtime Indigenous activist before being appointed a minister by President Lula da Silva, said: “[Among the goals of the Cop30 summit is] a request that countries recognise the demarcation of Indigenous lands as climate policy.”

    Continue reading...

  • Respected ocean expert Katy Soapi continues to advocate to protect Tetepare, one of the last untouched places in Solomon Islands

    Scientist Katy Soapi’s earliest memories are of the sea. She grew up on Rendova, a lush island in western Solomon Islands, and life centred around the ocean.

    “I remember when the big waves came, we would dive under them and come up laughing on the other side. Being part of those natural elements brought me so much joy.”

    Continue reading...

  • Cranbrook, Kent: We have no culture of consuming acorns in Britain, but they have a place in my kitchen, especially in a boom year such as this

    I tire of hearing the term “abundance” in relation to autumn, and yet the word unavoidably reverberates as the season unfolds, until even I am tempted to use it. Wild food is everywhere, as is a frenzy of gathering and preservation, a ritualised nod to that which was once essential.

    Not every year is the same, though. Several species don’t fruit every autumn, but instead coordinate with others of their kind on so called mast years to produce a bumper crop: a highly evolved tactic that serves to overwhelm the frenzied gatherers, both human and animal, so enough seed will survive to germination.

    Continue reading...

  • Investigation by Guardian and Carbon Brief finds just a fifth of funds to fight global heating went to poorest 44 countries

    China and wealthy petrostates including Saudi Arabia and UAE are among countries receiving large sums of climate finance, according to an analysis.

    The Guardian and Carbon Brief analysed previously unreported submissions to the UN, along with data from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), that show how billions of dollars of public money is being committed to the fight against global heating.

    Continue reading...

  • One in every 25 participants at 2025 UN climate summit is a fossil fuel lobbyist, according to Kick Big Polluters Out

    More than 1,600 fossil fuel lobbyists have been granted access to the Cop30 climate negotiations in Belém, significantly outnumbering every single country’s delegation apart from the host Brazil, new analysis has found.

    One in every 25 participants at this year’s UN climate summit is a fossil fuel lobbyist, according to the analysis by the Kick Big Polluters Out (KBPO) coalition, raising serious questions about the corporate capture and credibility of the annual Cop negotiations.

    Continue reading...

  • When the rain started I had to find a way home to my children. I could never have imagined how long it would take. This is Ruchira’s story

    Location Mumbai, India

    Disaster Maharashtra floods, 2005

    Ruchira Gupta is an English-to-Hindi interpreter, a former lawyer, and mother of two daughters. In 2005, she was working at a small law firm in Mumbai, India when heavy rainfall flooded the country’s western state of Maharashtra, killing 926 people. Between 1950 and2015, there was a threefold increase in extreme rain events in India.

    Continue reading...

  • Climate summit in Brazil needs to find way to stop global heating accelerating amid stark divisions

    “It broke my heart.” Surangel Whipps, president of the tiny Pacific nation of Palau, was sitting in the front row of the UN’s general assembly in New York when Donald Trump made a long and rambling speech, his first to the UN since his re-election, on 23 September.

    Whipps was prepared for fury and bombast from the US president, but what followed was shocking. Trump’s rant on the climate crisis – a “green scam”, “the greatest con job ever perpetrated”, “predictions made by stupid people” – was an unprecedented attack on science and global action from a major world leader.

    Continue reading...

  • Host uses Indigenous concepts and changes agenda to help delegates agree on ways to meet existing climate goals

    Shipping containers, cruise ships, river boats, schools and even army barracks have been pressed into service as accommodation for the 50,000 plus people descending on the Amazon: this year’s Cop30 climate summit is going to be, in many ways, an unconventional one.

    Located in Belém, a small city at the mouth of the Amazon river, the Brazilian hosts have been criticised for the exorbitant cost of scarce hotel rooms and hastily vacated apartments. Many delegations have slimmed down their presence, while business leaders have decamped to hold their own events in São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro.

    Continue reading...

  • Brazil’s president welcomes world leaders while navigating divided government, promising action on deforestation and emissions

    Brazil’s president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, has welcomed world leaders to Belém for the first climate summit in the Amazon, where conservationists hope he can be a champion for the rainforest and its people.

    But with a divided administration, a hostile Congress and 20th-century developmentalist instincts, this global figurehead of the centre left has a balancing act to perform in advocating protection of nature and a reduction of emissions.

    Continue reading...

Eco Health News feeds

Eco Nature News feeds