Today the European Parliament will vote on an objection to the Commission´s proposed scientific criteria for the determination of endocrine disruptors. An absolute majority is needed for the objection to pass.

Endocrine disruptors are chemicals widely used in industry that experts believe can increase the risk of cancer, obesity and other health problems.

The Commission’s criteria, which calls for a so-called “science-based approach” to the identification of endocrine disruptors, set the bar so high that only a few chemicals would fall into the scope of EU regulation.

GUE/NGL MEP Anja Hazekamp accused the Commission of being reckless about the health of millions of European citizens and the environment:

“For many years, the Commission has been trying to keep hormone-disrupting chemicals on the market while hundreds of studies have demonstrated that these substances are harmful to our health, even in small doses. And these substances are everywhere! They are in food packaging, cosmetics and toys. They are in pesticides which are sprayed on vegetables and fruits. They are in rubber granules of synthetic sports fields where children play football.”

“The Commission has the legal duty to protect humans, animals and the environment against exposure to hormone disruptors.”

A European Parliament legal opinion confirmed that the Commission is exceeding its powers by introducing a derogation to the identification of endocrine disruptors, an issue that the Dutch MEP highlighted: 

“I remind the Commission that this protection will not be sufficient if it keeps the back door open for hormone disruptors, particularly if it does so via an illegal procedure which renders the Parliament's involvement impossible. I also remind the Commission that this protection will not be sufficient if the burden of proof is unreasonably high and if the precautionary principle is not applied.”

“Half measures cannot be accepted, all hormone disruptors must be taken off the market. The Commission has already had enough opportunities. Commissioner, you actually do not deserve any more chances,” Hazekamp concluded.