Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
1 February 2017
E-000696-17
Question for written answer
to the Commission
Rule 130
Norbert Erdős (PPE)

 Subject:  Commission's official stance on the use of neonicotinoids
 Answer(s) 

Recent studies on the socioeconomic impact of neonicotinoids have highlighted a decrease in yields for certain crops such as oilseed rape across the EU. They have also shown that farmers are now forced to use older and less efficient technologies, which in some cases are more harmful than seeds treated with neonicotinoids. These findings have, for the most part, been confirmed by the Joint Research Centre’s own impact assessment. Furthermore, a recent study published by the Biodiversity Network for Bees in France found that the three main causes of bee deaths are, in descending order: pathogens, bad beekeeping practices and lack of food.

Given these latest findings, borne out by the clear impact on agriculture productivity and farmers’ ability to compete, how can the Commission continue to justify imposing restrictions on neonicotinoids?

Last updated: 20 February 2017Legal notice