EUROPEAN COMMISSION ADOPTS CHEMICALS PROPOSAL

The European Commission on 29 October adopted its proposal for the new European chemicals policy REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restrictions of Chemicals). The proposal will now need to be approved by the European Parliament and Council. Industry groups criticised the proposal for being burdensome and threatening innovation, while environmental groups said it did not go far enough.

The proposal had been revised following an extensive public consultation in an effort to make the system "less costly, less bureaucratic and more workable, while reinforcing the guarantees for health and environmental protection," the Commission noted. According to a new assessment of the policy's impact on the chemicals sector, the revision has lowered the direct cost to industry by 82 percent to EUR 2.3 billion over 11 years. The total cost for industry and downstream users is estimated at EUR 2.3 - 5.2 billion. The anticipated benefits to the environment and human health are thought to amount to EUR 50 billion over 30 years. The REACH legislation would replace 40 different pieces of current legislation and shift the burden of proof for the safety of chemicals from public authorities to companies that produce, import and use chemicals (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 3 October 2003)

Civil society groups -- including the European Environmental Bureau, Friends of the Earth UK, Greenpeace, European Public Health Alliance and Women in Europe for a Common Future -- expressed their disappointment with the revised proposal which they said was a "mere shadow" of the earlier draft, "having been watered down to suit many unjustified industry demands". Among other things, they criticised the "loophole" for hazardous chemicals, which the proposal did not try hard enough to eliminate, calling on the European Parliament and national governments to "use their chance to close this". While welcoming the draft for its potential to raise awareness about chemicals in daily use, the European Consumers' Organisation agreed that the revised text had been "severely weakened" and now failed to address key consumer issues, such as information on chemicals in consumer articles.

Industry groups continued to attack the proposal as overly costly and threatening European industry's competitiveness. The Union of Industrial and Employers' Confederations in Europe (UNICE) expressed concerns over what they saw as an "inadequate consultation of downstream users". Specifically, they noted that the REACH legislation had yet to be assessed through a comprehensive impact assessment and a dialogue with sectors using chemicals. The European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC) echoed the calls for an independent assessment, criticising the Commission's study as focusing too much on costs while neglecting the wider impacts on employment, investment, time to market or loss of know-how. They pointed to the big differences of estimates compared to studies undertaken for industry (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 11 July 2003). In contrast, environmental groups welcomed the Commission's estimates which they said exposed the "industry's scaremongering".

Moreover, business groups raised concerns over the policy's impacts on imports and exports, calling for a full cost-benefit analysis. Christophe Leitl, President of Eurochambres, and Thomas J. Donohue, President of the US Chamber of Commerce, in a joint letter to the Financial Times noted that the Commission proposal had "structural and practical flaws that will result in unintended consequences". They called on European regulators "to make sure REACH does not violate World Trade Organisation discipline in either its design or implementation".

Additional Resources

For further information, including the new proposal, reactions and impact assessments, see EurActiv.

"Chemicals review - fight over impact assessment results continues," EURACTIV, 17 October 2003; "Commission presents proposal to modernise EU legislation," EU PRESS RELEASE, 29 October 2003; "Hazardous chemical exposure: a never ending story?," BEUC, 28 October 2002; "Slimmed-down REACH needs healthy supplement," EEB, FOE, Greenpeace, EPHA, AECF, 29 October 2003; "REACH: Serious concerns about inadequate consultation of downstream users," UNICE, 29 October 2003; "EU plan for chemical industry is deeply flawed," FT LETTER, 31 October 2003.