Jump to content


EU Parliament sets up committee on glyphosate and pesticide approval flaws

News item

Friday 9 Feb 2018

Nessa Childers, MEP for Dublin, welcomed this week’s decision to establish a special committee to probe the EU’s decision-making process on pesticide approval, in the wake of the “Monsanto Papers” revelations.

Speaking from Strasbourg after the plenary votes, Ms. Childers, a member of Parliament’s Environment, Public Health and Food Safety Committee, said:

“The revelations of Monsanto’s maneuvering to influence the scientific assessment of glyphosate and ensure the renewal of its EU authorisation raise serious questions about our ability to safeguard human health and to objectively assess the safety of chemical products.

“This probe will enable us to examine not only how the European Food Safety Agency and the European Chemicals Agency have discharged their responsibilities to assess the safety of glyphosates but also how pesticides are allowed into the EU markets in general.

“This is crucial for the environment and our citizens’ health. It is no less important in terms of public trust in our institutions and in the evidence they seek to inform the decisions they make on our behalf.”


EU Carbon reform: some progress and much resistance from national governments

News item

Wednesday 7 Feb 2018

Nessa Childers, MEP for Dublin, gave a guarded welcome to the approval of the deal reached between the European Parliament and the EU’s national governments to reform the Union’s carbon emissions trading scheme.

The EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) is the first and largest international market scheme to cap and trade greenhouse gas emissions.

 It covers close to half of all emissions in the region, including power plants and heavy industry.

 Speaking from Strasbourg after the final vote in Parliament, on Tuesday, Ms. Childers, a member of the Committee on the Environment, said:

“We are used to seeing this policy described as the EU’s flagship on the fight against climate change, but the fact is that, since the inception of the scheme, it has been plagued by an overabundance of allowances.

 “Big corporate polluters were granted free allowances to offset competition from those who face no emission penalties abroad. It turns out they not only had plenty to use for production, but ended up selling these free allocations in the market and pocketed the profits.

 “The pricing signal has been too low to incentivise decarbonisation, which calls into question the very purpose of this complex and expensive enterprise.

“I have been part of previous efforts to removing allowances from the market, and welcome the higher rate at which the available quantity will be progressively reduced, even if it is lower than what we need. It will need to be corrected at the earliest available opportunity.

“The necessary shift from carbon-intensive activities in our economies will affect a number of sectors, so this reform rightly includes funding mechanisms to support innovation, transition to sustainable energy production and retraining for workers.”

 “Too many member state governments and conservative forces keep dragging their feet on this and other policy fronts we need to avert catastrophic climate change.

“Unfortunately, reckoning with the price of environmental disasters is something our governments have yet to properly do. Let us hope the same does not keep happening to the price signal of our carbon allowances.”

ENDS