‘REACH reform delay poses serious threat to masses as Commission chooses Industry over Environment’
By Glen Barclay 15 November 2022
The European Environmental Bureau in Brussels is at the epicentre of chemical reform
Image by Glen Barclay
The complicated nature of chemical regulation, once at the forefront of the European agenda, has slipped from view with the delay in the reforms outlined by the REACH department.
Despite declaring it a primary focus of their mandate the sitting Commission has postponed the reformation of chemical regulations to the final quarter of 2023 leaving very little room for maneuver should further stumbling blocks arrive.
Andreea Anca, Communications Officer at the European Environmental Bureau, is skeptical of the current Commissions ambition to see this deal through despite its public claims, “the European Green Deal provided a vision for the future, them putting the environment and the people on their political agenda was unprecedented, it would be the biggest legacy of this Commission but it has fizzled out like a balloon.”
The Commission’s arguments of awarding this stay of implementation of the reforms appear at first glance to be for the benefit of Europe’s pharmaceutical powerhouses, choosing the stability of European economics during the energy crisis over their long-term environmental goals.
The changing political tide in Europe has seen a massive swing to the right with many overlooking the environmental issues in favour of prioritising financial markets and industry giants, something Mariana Goulart, Policy Officer at the EEB, is fearful of:
“This Commission’s mandate had the Green deal as its top priority and we are seeing a tendency in Europe of governments going more to the Far Right which priorities the economical side of things. We fear that if this continues for the next mandate then Green will not be a priority at all and we won’t get the reform needed because they are so pro-industry.”
Should the reforms be introduced before the end of the current Commission’s premiership those at the EEB question whether the reforms will be bullish enough to induct meaningful change, “they also changed the [original] text, instead of being pro-environment, pro-sustainability, pro-human health [it now focuses] on industry concerns and protection of European industry. We already fear that the reforms will not be ambitious enough.”
The long term ramifications of such a delay have left those who petitioned for these reforms in disbelief at the negligence of the European Commission. Despite the severity of the subject the REACH department was unavailable for comment. In a matter as important as this it is important to have balance between parties however the facts remain stoic in their virtue, this postponement has consequences for all, even those who hold the keys of power. It appears a genuine possibility that should these reforms face further delay that they are ushered into the next Commissions premiership and ultimately removed from the negotiation table.