Flawed EU decision making threatens European horticulture

The European Commission has admitted that it lacks a thorough evaluation of the full impact of proposals which will affect adversely horticulture throughout Europe, as well as the international trade of fresh fruit and vegetables and subsequent availability of food.  The proposals aim to introduce cut-off criteria and substitution of crop protection products on a risk-based approach (Plant Protection Products Directive 91/414).

 “This is a fundamental flaw in the decision-making process”, said Nigel Jenney, Chief Executive of the Fresh Produce Consortium. “The Fresh Produce Consortium is calling on the European Parliament to carry out a comprehensive assessment of the impact of these proposals. In the absence of this evaluation, we believe that the European Parliament should reject these proposals at its second reading in October.”

FPC continues to lobby hard with others to raise awareness of the issues, resulting in MEPs raising questions to the European Commission. In response the European Commission has stated that it “did not conduct an assessment of the impact of the criteria on food production and farmers, because at the time of its original proposal it was not possible to anticipate which substances would remain on the market at the end of the review”.

“There is a perception among the Commission that the application for a bureaucratic time-limited derogation for “cut off substances” can be used to enable the horticulture industry to retain the use of products where no other alternative is available. However in reality this will not provide either an

urgent solution to a sudden outbreak of persistent pests, weeds and diseases for fruit and vegetable crops or tackle long-term issues of resistant strains,” adds Nigel Jenney. 

The proposals could have severe implications for pest management globally if resistant strains selected as a result of intensive use of surviving active substances spread. Without a viable market in Europe it is feasible that some crop protection companies might have to reconsider their investment in research for alternative products.

These same pesticides are used to control crop pests, weeds and diseases in other parts of the world and so any imported produce with minute residues of these substances could be banned from the EU, despite the fact that these pesticides are approved for use in non-EU countries. This could be deemed to be a barrier to international trade.

Food security will be affected, with pressures on the availability of agricultural land and lack of sustainable supplies of commonly eaten produce, such as brassicas.  Increasing production costs would make it either uneconomic to grow certain crops in the UK or it would contribute significantly to rising food prices, doubling the price of brassicas.

“Currently around 1.9 million less well off people in the UK are eating less than one serving of fruit and vegetables a day. With increasing levels of obesity across Europe, particularly among young people, we should be encouraging more people to eat fresh fruit and vegetables.  These proposals will make produce less affordable and reduce the UK’s food security, which is fundamentally at odd to the UK Government’s strategy,” comments Nigel Jenney. 

 “It is vital that the European Union retains a range of products that allows the horticulture industry to provide good quality healthy produce in a sustainable manner. We must maintain the pressure for a thorough assessment of the impact of these proposals.”