European Commission was criticized for its slowness in withdrawing dangerous substances from the market

European Commission was criticized for its slowness in withdrawing dangerous substances from the market shutterstock
Hanna Velyka

Officials must give a comprehensive answer to the comments within three months

Many particularly dangerous substances remain on the market, sometimes for years, while the EU executive does not meet statutory deadlines for authorization decisions.

This was stated by the EU ombudsman Emily O'Reilly, writes Euronews.

She believes that the reason for the systematic delays in making decisions on the permission to use dangerous chemicals is "bad administration" on the part of the European Commission. The ombudsman emphasized that this practice endangers people and ecosystems.

By law, the Commission is obliged to consider a draft decision within 3 months after a request for a permit to continue using a prohibited substance. But the results of the investigation initiated by O'Reilly showed that the EU executive takes on average more than 14 months to make such decisions, and sometimes several years.

Such data did not come as a surprise to activists of environmental campaigns. They have complained for years about the too slow pace of the process of limiting chemicals in the EU.

The ombudsman also criticized the secrecy surrounding the committee. She is sure that the Commission's lack of transparency is also improper administration. According to O'Reilly, public records of the meetings contain little information about the reasons for the delays or the positions of individual governments.

"Such unacceptable behavior undermines the rule of law and people's trust in EU institutions. It's time for EU officials to heed the ombudsman's recommendations and put the public interest ahead of the profits of toxic companies," said Helen Dugy of the legal charity ClientEarth.

Reasons for delays

In the Commission, the very low speed of decision-making on the prohibition of dangerous substances was explained by several factors:

  1. A complex process prescribed in REACH – the main EU regulation on chemicals.
  2. European Commission officials "in principle avoid voting [on decisions] if there is no certainty of sufficient support" from the 27 EU member states.
  3. A limited number of appropriate conference rooms in the premises of the Commission.

In 3 months, the European Commission must give a detailed response to the ombudsman's criticism. Its president, Ursula von der Leyen, has promised to "simplify" regulation during her second term, after being criticized for delaying a planned revision of the REACH regulation during her first term.

Earlier, EcoPolitic reported that in the EU was limited the use of another "eternal chemical". Also in August we told that the Ukrainian market will be freed from particularly dangerous chemicals.

Tags: ,
Related
The Rada has approved in principle a draft law on goods linked to deforestation
The Rada has approved in principle a draft law on goods linked to deforestation

The Eco-Committee still needs to take all the amendments and proposals into account before the second reading

The European Parliament has extended the scope of the CBAM to cover derivative products and closed loopholes that allowed the rules to be circumvented
The European Parliament has extended the scope of the CBAM to cover derivative products and closed loopholes that allowed the rules to be circumvented

At the same time, EU exporters who are hardest hit by the SVAM may be eligible for support from the Temporary Decarbonisation Fund as early as 2027

Stability of the carbon market: the European Parliament has adopted amendments to EU ETS 1 and ETS 2
Stability of the carbon market: the European Parliament has adopted amendments to EU ETS 1 and ETS 2

The decision is an attempt to strike a balance between business competitiveness and climate targets

Revolutionary changes in the EU: governments want to make it compulsory to reinvest 75% of ETS revenues in decarbonisation
Revolutionary changes in the EU: governments want to make it compulsory to reinvest 75% of ETS revenues in decarbonisation

The rationale behind this proposal is to support the eco-modernisation of enterprises, which generate revenue for the system and bear the brunt of the fiscal pressure