EU ‘Green Deal’ softens hard-line proposals for extensive restrictions on pesticides as food security concerns escalate
EU ‘Green Deal’ softens hard-line proposals for extensive restrictions on pesticides as food security concerns escalate


EU countries are pushing back against the European Commission’s plans to radically slash the use of pesticides in the bloc, arguing now is not the time to put food production in jeopardy.
EU ambassadors agreed on [November 16] to ask the Commission for additional analysis on its proposal to halve the use of pesticides in the bloc by 2030, four diplomats told POLITICO. A last-minute climbdown from the Commission, in which it said it would water down significant parts of the bill, failed to sway the diplomats. The move will likely set the proposal back by months, or could even kill it if the bill isn’t finalized by the end of the Commission’s mandate in 2024.
The Commission shared a paper, obtained by POLITICO, which suggested it is open to climbing down on on key areas of its bill after months of refusing to budge. In a stark acknowledgement of the opposition the bill faces, the EU’s executive said: “The Commission’s proposal is seen as too ambitious and affecting a disproportionately high area of Member States’ territory.”
The Commission said it could water down its proposed ban on all pesticide use in so-called sensitive areas, a part of its original proposal that has been fiercely contested by agriculture ministries which say it will curtail food production.
Instead it said it could move away from a “total ban” on all pesticides in favor of prioritizing the use of low-risk ones, while still allowing “most pesticides” to be used in ecologically sensitive areas and slimming down the total area of those protected zones to the “most relevant areas” only.
…
But the diplomats were not swayed. “That was a last minute effort, trying to salvage the whole thing, they utterly failed,” one diplomat said.
This is an excerpt. Read the original post here

![]() | Videos | More... |

Video: Nuclear energy will destroy us? Global warming is an existential threat? Chemicals are massacring bees? Donate to the Green Industrial Complex!
![]() | Bees & Pollinators | More... |

GLP podcast: Science journalism is a mess. Here’s how to fix it

Mosquito massacre: Can we safely tackle malaria with a CRISPR gene drive?

Are we facing an ‘Insect Apocalypse’ caused by ‘intensive, industrial’ farming and agricultural chemicals? The media say yes; Science says ‘no’
![]() | Infographics | More... |

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer
![]() | GMO FAQs | More... |

Why is there controversy over GMO foods but not GMO drugs?

How are GMOs labeled around the world?

How does genetic engineering differ from conventional breeding?
![]() | GLP Profiles | More... |

Alex Jones: Right-wing conspiracy theorist stokes fear of GMOs, pesticides to sell ‘health supplements’








Viewpoint — Fact checking MAHA mythmakers: How wellness influencers and RFK, Jr. undermine American science and health
Viewpoint: Video — Big Solar is gobbling up productive agricultural land and hurting farmers yet providing little energy or sustainabilty gains
Fighting deforestation with CO2: Biotechnology breakthrough creates sustainable palm oil alternative for cosmetics
Trust issues: What happens when therapists use ChatGPT?
California, Washington, Oregon forge immunization alliance to safeguard vaccine access against federal undermining
30-year-old tomato line shows genetic resistance to devastating virus
The free-range chicken dilemma: Better for birds, but with substantial costs
‘You have to treat the brain first’: Rethinking chronic pain with Sanjay Gupta