EPA's plan 'not good enough'
The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) is bolstering its frontline applications teams in a bid to reduce the timeframe for new product applications, but agri chemical producers say that it isn't good enough.
This follows an application from the Environmental Law Initiative (ELI), which claims there is significant new information about the negative effects of the substance to warrant a reassessment.
Glyphosate - widely used on many arable farms - is the active ingredient in the weed killer Roundup. However, Roundup is only one of 89 mixtures containing glyphosate that are approved for use in New Zealand. A broad spectrum herbicide, glyphosate works by targeting an ESPS synthase enzyme, found in plants but not humans or animals.
Glyphosate was approved for use in New Zealand before the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act came into force in 1996. A number of glyphosate-containing substances were moved into the HSNO framework during a 'transfer' process in 2004. At the time of this transfer, glyphosate-containing substances were assessed and assigned rules for use as well as hazard classifications.
Since then, there have been a number of applications under the HSNO Act seeking approval to import and manufacture glyphosate-containing substances. Grounds for reassessment requests are non-notified processes, meaning requests are not publicly notified and there is no opportunity for submissions to be made.
Applications are assessed to determine whether the benefits of using the substance outweigh the adverse effects, with the process looking at potential effects on the environment, public health, Māori culture, people and communities and the economy while also considering how the potential risks from substances can be managed.
ELI Director Legal and Research Matt Hall told Rural News that since glyphosate was last considered in the 1970s, significant new information has emerged about the health and environmental effects of glyphosate.
"The volume and complexity of the information is not for the faint heart on glyphosate. I think that is indicative of the fact that a proper reassessment would be a good thing," he says.
"We've curated and submitted a high level selection of the most important, independent, scientific information. That information does show that there are significant environmental and health effects and our submission is that that should establish the legal grounds for reassessment."
In a statement to Rural News, an EPA representative said that the organisation continually reviews global research and developments on hazardous substances including glyphosate.
The EPA added that it is currently reviewing the findings from a European Food Safety Authorityreport on glyphosate released in JUly this year, as well as recommandations from the European Chemicals Agency on hazard classifications for glyphosate.
Some 28 countries worldwide have banned glyphosate either at a national or divisional level. While Hall says the regulatory processes will differ from country to country, he is wary of industry influence in regulation. A decision-making committee will consider information from the applicant and EPA research to decide whether there are grounds to reassess glyphosate. If the committee decides that grounds do exist, then a reassessment can be undertaken.
