Glyphosate European Parliament debate

Richard Ashworth (ECR). Mr President, this House has a duty to ensure that public food is safe and that the environment is responsibly managed, and we must take those responsibilities very seriously indeed. But on the other hand, we must also ensure that decisions we make are strictly proportionate to risk, not to hazard, and we must be aware of the consequences of those decisions.

 

In the case of glyphosate – a product which is endorsed by the Food Standards Agency as safe and for which there is no immediate substitute – for the industry to achieve the same effects, it would have to revert to more traditional mechanical operations. I could not disagree more with some of the comments which were made earlier about mechanical operations. We would have to revert to greater use of other agrochemicals and, in consequence, we would add considerably to the costs of an industry that is already under great difficulty. This House must be guided by the facts and common sense, not emotion. I urge the Commission to renew approval.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *