An analysis conducted on behalf of the German conservation organisation BUND comes to the conclusion that exempting TTIP from the EUs precautionary principle could compromise consumer protection. If the transatlantic trade agreement is adopted, the study revealed, Europe could end up being exposed to more carcinogenic, hormonally active and environmentally harmful chemicals. For this reason, BUND is calling on the European Commission to stop negotiations on TTIP immediately. According to the NGO, TTIP is a threat to EU standards that protect against chemicals that are harmful to humans and the environment. Chemicals regulation differs significantly between the EU and the United States. BUND said over 1,300 chemical cosmetics additives and more than 80 pesticide substances are banned in the EU, but approved for use in products made in the US. This discrepancy is indicative of the very different legal situation in the two regions. In the U.S., a comparatively small number of chemicals are banned and industrial enterprises are not required to prove a substances safety. The EU, on the other hand, regulates according to the principle of no data, no market for chemicals manufacturers. Before a substance is allowed on the market, the company must provide proof of its harmlessness. Under this precautionary principle, bans and permission restrictions may also be implemented if final proof of a chemicals risks has not yet been submitted. The precautionary principle which applies to us here, should under no circumstances become a bargaining chip, said BUND chairman Hubert Weiger in Berlin. Allegedly necessary harmonisations or so-called mutual recognition within the framework of TTIP should not be allowed, Weiger argued. The BUND chairman accused the US government of attacking recent efforts in the EU to better protect consumers from hormonally active chemicals. Under the guise of avoiding barriers to trade, the Obama Administration has repeatedly submitted written requests to the European Commission, asking that it not pass any protective measures against risky chemicals that it considers to be discriminating or unjustified, Weiger said. The public in the US and the EU must be given the best possible protection against chemicals that are harmful to health, he said, but with TTIP, chemicals corporations on both sides of the Atlantic hope to achieve the opposite. We do not need a so-called free trade agreement that weakens consumer protection, the BUND chairman contended. Meanwhile, the German Chemicals Industry Association (VCI) vehemently rejected the allegation from BUND, that chemicals companies are aiming for lower protection of the population from chemicals that are harmful to health. The German chemicals industry is committed to the European chemicals regulation REACH, said the VCIs managing director Utz Tillmann. By no means will TTIP lead to softening of standards in chemicals safety. The regulations that are relevant to chemicals TSCA in the US and REACH in Europe are designed very differently. For this reason, mutual recognition is not possible, Tillmann indicated. At the same time, the VCI said it believes that duplicated efforts can be avoided and trade barriers can be eliminated without encroaching upon protection standards. In this context, Tillmann referred to the TTIP negotiation paper on regulatory cooperation published by the Commission at the beginning of May. There, the Commission makes it clear that negotiations on converging any kind of regulation can only take place if no standards are lowered and both sides actually want regulatory cooperation. In addition, VCI continued, the impression BUND created, saying the EUs precautionary principle could be questioned under to TTIP, has absolutely no basis. The precautionary principle is a part of the Lisbon Treaty and thereby the EUs fundamental treaties, Tillmann said. As a result, it cannot be eliminated by a treaty under international law like TTIP. Instead of constructing groundless claims, the VCI said, it would be more constructive if the BUND would seek out dialogue with us on these issues.
Euractiv, 25 June 2015 ;http://www.euractiv.com/ ;