Volledig verslag van de vergaderingen

Dinsdag 3 oktober 2023 - Straatsburg

20. Indeling, etikettering en verpakking van stoffen en mengsels (debat)

  President. – The next item is the debate on the report by Maria Spyraki, on behalf of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety on Classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures (COM(2022)0748 – C9-0433/2022 – 2022/0432(COD)) (A9-0271/2023).

  Maria Spyraki, rapporteur. – Mr President, honourable Vice-President, dear colleagues, the EU is the second largest producer of chemicals in the world, with a sales turnover of EUR 594 billion and 15% of the global sales, according to the official data of 2021. The EU chemical industry numbers 29 000 enterprises – big, and also small and medium enterprises. Chemicals are everywhere, improving our living standards, but also many of them have hazardous properties that can harm our health and the environment.

Today we debate the revision of one of the two cornerstones of the EU chemical legislation. The revised framework of the Regulation on Classification, Labelling and Packaging will be applied to all industrial sectors, manufacturers, importers and downstream users in order to classify the substance and mixtures of their products packets and label them accordingly before placing them on the market.

After six months of fruitful and thorough negotiation – and I would like to thank all the shadow rapporteurs – we achieved to reach an agreement in six compromise amendments that we have adopted by the majority of the political groups in the ENVI Committee. Achieving that, we managed to improve the Commission’s proposal by aligning it with the needs of the European citizens in the industry, providing classification where needed, making it more efficient and implementable and increasing the safety of the European way of life, dear Vice-President.

In my capacity as the rapporteur, it is of utmost importance to have a revised CLP Regulation with a focus to ensure the safety of consumers, increase the level of the environmental protection, ensure a smooth transition period for the market and do not distract the market of the essential oil sector – which includes agriculture, SMEs and big industries in various Member States, including France, Spain, Italy, Poland, Bulgaria and my home country, Greece.

In this regard, and based on the very good collaboration with the so-called ‘von der Leyen alliance’ political groups, the Commission and the ECA as well, we managed to conclude the report that brings the appropriate consideration to the following issues.

First, we focus to increase the level of information to the consumers and facilitate the use of the digital label. We also focus to enhance consumer awareness on the distance sales by adopting the provision that for the sale to the general public of a substance classified as hazardous shall request the user to always read and follow product label information. We reached an agreement on the essential oils: that the Article 5(3) related to MOCs, which are the mixtures, shall not apply to substances containing more than one constituent of renewable botanical origin and are not chemically nor genetically modified. By this exclusion, we reinforce the sector – based mainly on agriculture, as I have already said – and SMEs ensuring safety and sustainability as the main pillars of the production.

We proposed a provision of six months for updating the labels to the SMEs. We also agreed to secure the necessary support to ECHA. We included in the scope a reference for the animal testing, in order to promote alternative methods, and with this revision of the CLP and hopefully the revision of REACH when it comes, it will maintain the pioneering role of Europe to make safe and sustainable chemical by design.

Dear colleagues, concluding, I would like to highlight that by supporting this proposal with a vast majority tomorrow, we make a significant step forward for the protection of the consumers and the environment. It is critical to increase the level of information provided for all products containing chemicals and also to address risks arising from online sales. It is also important to facilitate our industry and SMEs to adapt and maintain their competitiveness and to provide to ECHA the proper resources.

  Μαργαρίτης Σχοινάς, Αντιπρόεδρος της Επιτροπής. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κυρίες και κύριοι μέλη του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου, επιτρέψτε μου, πριν από όλα, να ευχαριστήσω και να συγχαρώ τη συνάδελφο, συμπατριώτισσα και φίλη εισηγήτρια, Μαρία Σπυράκη, για τον πολύ αποτελεσματικό τρόπο με τον οποίο διαχειρίστηκε αυτόν τον σύνθετο φάκελο.

Αυτός ο κανονισμός αποτελεί, ίσως, τον βασικό πυλώνα της νομοθεσίας μας για τις χημικές ουσίες και για να εξασφαλίσουμε την ασφαλή χρήση των χημικών από τους καταναλωτές αλλά και τους εργαζόμενους στον τομέα, χρειάζεται να βεβαιωθούμε ότι υπάρχει επαρκής πληροφόρηση γύρω από τους κινδύνους για την ανθρώπινη υγεία και το περιβάλλον που συνδέονται με αυτές τις ουσίες. Μόνο όταν καταφέρουμε να επισημάνουμε, να αναγνωρίσουμε και να πληροφορήσουμε για αυτούς τους κινδύνους, τότε, με αυτόν τον κανονισμό, θα βοηθηθούμε στο να μπορέσουμε να περάσουμε στο ευρύ κοινό και τους χρήστες την απαραίτητη πληροφόρηση μέσω των ετικετών και άλλων τέτοιων μέσων δημοσιότητας.

Εξάλλου, η κατηγοριοποίηση των χημικών ουσιών κάτω από τον κανονισμό αυτόν που συζητάμε σήμερα είναι κάτι που θα έχει άμεσο αντίκτυπο σε άλλες κοινοτικές νομοθετικές πρωτοβουλίες, σε άλλα νομοθετικά ευρωπαϊκά κείμενα για τα παιχνίδια, τα καλλυντικά, τα λιπάσματα και τα εντομοκτόνα —ειδικά για κινδύνους που έχουν να κάνουν και με την έκθεση σε αυτές τις επικίνδυνες ουσίες και βιομηχανικές εκπομπές. Επίσης, εξίσου σημαντικό είναι ότι αυτό που λέμε πράσινη ταξινομία επίσης έχει πολλά να κερδίσει από αυτή την κατηγοριοποίηση που φέρνει ο εν λόγω κανονισμός.

Honourable Members, the fruitful discussions on this proposal at committee stage have paved the way to today’s discussion.

We, the Commission, see the plenary adopting Parliament’s mandate on Wednesday that would allow us to trigger swiftly the inter-institutional negotiations still this year.

The main elements of this revision are, firstly, a delegated act that introduced crosscutting criteria to identify endocrine disruptors, persistent substances contaminating food webs and the pristine environment.

This entered into force this April, and I thank this House for your support throughout this process. This is the first element of the chemicals strategy we announced and impacts on the changes to the regulation we are discussing today.

The second element of the package is, of course, the revised regulation, the one that is on the table and is the subject of our discussions today. This proposal revises some existing provisions on classification and labelling to make them more efficient and to provide clear information, especially on hazards to consumers, workers and users.

At the same time, the proposal simplifies the regulatory processes and labelling rules, which will reduce burden on industry, especially for small and medium enterprises, whilst at the same time providing clear information to users.

This is done by introducing additional digitalisation of some label elements and by adjusting our labelling and packaging requirements to the new sales form that is refill packaging instead of single-use bottles.

Companies, in particular small enterprises, will enjoy easier access to more robust information on the hazards, and this, in fine, will translate into tangible benefits for consumers and users.

The new proposal will bring also more flexibility for multilingual labels, allowing enterprises to place their products across the single market more easily.

At the same time, the proposal ensures that online sales are handled in a way so that consumers are properly informed about the chemical risks of products that are offered via the internet.

Finally, enforcement is key to achieve the level of protection we are aiming at. That is why the proposal strengthens the legal basis for the application of EU rules, also tackling issues for online sales of chemicals.

Let me conclude with a few words on certain things that we would still need to discuss. First of all, the ENVI Committee’s report on the tabled amendments shows that Parliament understands the stakes and the importance of this regulation.

But at the same time, some amendments touch upon key elements of the proposal. Let me cite some of these issues that would require further discussions at interinstitutional level.

First, we take good note of your concerns on the proposed rules for the classification of complex substances, and in particular the potential impact on the sector of essential oils.

Second, we agree on the importance of ensuring consumers’ safety regardless of the form in which they buy chemicals, including through refill sales. The Commission is of the view that substances and mixtures can be safely sold via refill stations. Selling products via refill stations is one of the promising levers to reduce packaging waste, which this House is currently discussing.

Third, labels should be easily legible, a necessity to ensure well-informed consumers and users of chemicals, especially for an ever-ageing European population.

Finally, we note the concerns regarding green claims, which we share. As you know, we have proposed a directive setting up robust common criteria to prevent misleading claims and greenwashing. Hence, we would not consider it necessary to provide these same criteria in this regulation.

But overall, to conclude, it is very encouraging to see the strong engagement and the broad agreement across the political groups in the ENVI Committee. I look forward to the debate today and to the vote tomorrow.

  Dennis Radtke, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich möchte zunächst einmal der Kollegin Maria Spyraki ganz herzlich zu ihrer herausragenden Arbeit gratulieren und mich dafür auch bedanken. Gerade bei diesem technischen Dossier, die unterschiedlichen Enden zusammenzubinden, um einen realistischen Entwurf hinzubekommen, ist eine schwierige Aufgabe.

Die EVP-Änderungsanträge 101, 102, 103 bieten, glaube ich, die Chance, die guten erreichten Kompromisse noch ein Stück weit besser zu machen. Mir ist auch wichtig, noch mal darauf hinzuweisen, dass die Frage der Schriftgröße und auch die Frage der Umsetzungsfristen für die Unternehmen − das wird ja morgen noch einmal ein Thema sein, hoffentlich auch in den Trilogverhandlungen noch einmal ein Thema sein.

Denn insgesamt dürfen wir eins nicht vergessen: Ja, Chemie muss sicher sein. Deswegen haben wir auch weltweit das schärfste Chemikalienrecht. Deswegen ist unser Chemikalienrecht international der Goldstandard. Aber wir müssen auch dafür Sorge tragen, gerade in der jetzigen Situation, in der jetzigen Krise, dass es für die chemische Industrie am Ende auch leistbar bleibt.

Ich habe ein Leben vor der Politik. Ich habe in Deutschland bei der Chemiegewerkschaft gearbeitet, und deswegen weiß ich aus eigener Erfahrung: Chemie steht für hohe Löhne, für hohe Tarifbindung, für mitbestimmte Arbeitsplätze, für hochinnovative Arbeitsplätze. Und ich erwarte auch von der EU-Kommission − Kommissar Schinas hat darauf hingewiesen: Chemiestrategie −, dass wir auch alles dafür tun, dass diese Industrie als wichtiges Rückgrat für wirtschaftliches Wachstum in Europa auch weiterhin ein Zuhause hat und eine gute Zukunft hat.

  João Albuquerque, em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, permita-me começar por dizer que aprovámos o primeiro pilar, ou estamos em vias de aprovar o primeiro pilar com a CLP, faltará agora a REACH, para concluirmos também a estratégia dos químicos.

Classificação, rotulagem e embalagem de químicos às 9h30 da noite de uma terça-feira. Não é um daqueles temas que nos faça apaixonar pela União Europeia, mas, contra as expectativas iniciais, talvez possa ser um daqueles temas que nos ajuda a entender melhor esta União e de que forma é que o trabalho aqui desenvolvido pode contribuir para melhorar a vida de cada uma e de cada um dos cidadãos europeus.

Desde o início deste processo legislativo, que foi longo, intenso e muito trabalhoso, houve apenas uma questão a que procurámos dar resposta: como podemos aproveitar esta oportunidade de revisão técnica de uma legislação tão complexa que regula substâncias químicas para melhorar os índices de proteção e informação do consumidor?

É preciso deixar claro, e reforçar as vezes que forem necessárias, que ao longo de todo este processo, este foi o nosso objetivo primordial e conseguimos fazer isso ao mesmo tempo que soubemos ouvir os diferentes setores abrangidos por esta legislação – do setor dos detergentes aos produtos cosméticos, passando pelo setor dos óleos essenciais, soubemos entender as especificidades de cada um.

Procurámos encontrar soluções que não comprometam as pequenas e médias empresas europeias, sobrecarregando-as com adaptações burocráticas desnecessárias. Tivemos atenção às práticas existentes dos pequenos produtores europeus no impacto que têm nas diferentes regiões, acomodando várias das suas preocupações e entendendo as especificidades dos óleos essenciais.

Garantimos o compromisso abrangente em diferentes dimensões fundamentais, como é a necessidade de utilização rápida dos consumidores cada vez que há alterações substanciais no conhecimento científico e no seu impacto nos produtos e na saúde dos consumidores.

Caros colegas, amanhã, quando estivermos a votar o relatório final e as últimas emendas apresentadas, não podemos perder de vista o objetivo inicial a que nos propusemos. Os compromissos alcançados, melhorados pontualmente por algumas das emendas propostas, não podem ser colocados em risco pela ambição de agradar a interesses comerciais.

Para melhorarmos este regulamento em benefício dos europeus, temos de respeitar o trabalho desenvolvido na Comissão do Ambiente e aprovar os compromissos negociados anteriormente. É por isso que considero que o acordo que alcançámos, depois de muita negociação e trabalho e que compromete os maiores grupos políticos desta Câmara, precisa de ser aprovado.

Por último, não podia terminar sem referir que alcançar este equilíbrio sem colocar em causa o objetivo inicial a que nos propusemos só foi possível graças ao trabalho desenvolvido pela relatora Maria Spyraki e pela equipa de relatores, bem como por toda a equipa do S&D.

Só assim, com este objetivo em mente, é que foi possível fazer Europa também nas coisas mais técnicas.

  Атидже Алиева-Вели, от името на групата Renew. – Г-н Председател, г-н Заместник-председател на Комисията, колеги, този дебат за мен, като български евродепутат, е с дъх на българска роза. Розовото масло е емблема на страната ни, поминък и живот за хиляди трудолюбиви производители. Преразгледаният регламент ще обозначава продуктите с растителен произход като смес и етикетирането им ще зависи от включено в тях химическо вещество, независимо от въздействието на целия продукт.

 Подкрепяйки промени в законодателството в защита на здравето и по-добрата информираност на потребителите, остават и въпроси: има ли достатъчно безспорни научни доказателства, че тези вещества крият риск? Ще позволим ли с промените да застрашим производители на етерични култури и масла? Емблематичното българско розово масло и други етерични масла ще бъдат ли обозначени като „опасни“?

Това не само застрашава богатото ни наследство, но и икономическата стабилност в тези региони. Този регламент може да наруши конкурентното ни предимство, да ни измести от важни пазари, да възпрепятства икономическия растеж и да ограничи перспективите пред малките и средните предприятия.

Нашите производители заслужават политики, които насърчават растежа им. Затова утре делегацията на ДПС ще подкрепи розопроизводителите и останалите производители. Призовавам ви, колеги, да го направите и вие!

  Jutta Paulus, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, meine Damen und Herren! Ich freue mich! Ich freue mich wirklich, dass wir in diesen Verhandlungen zur Verordnung über die Einstufung, Kennzeichnung und Verpackung von Stoffen und Gemischen zu guten Kompromissen gekommen sind. Ich möchte mich bei Maria Spyraki bedanken für die fairen und konstruktiven Verhandlungen, denn das ist wirklich ein wichtiger Schritt für den Verbraucherschutz.

Die Kennzeichnung gefährlicher Chemikalien ist wirklich wichtig für die Gesundheit der Beschäftigten in den jeweiligen Branchen, aber auch für die von Bürgerinnen und Bürgern. Ich bin sehr froh, dass wir erstmals eine Kennzeichnung bekommen werden für hormonähnlich wirkende Chemikalien. Das gab es bisher noch nicht, das ist wirklich ein Novum, und ich baue darauf, dass das auch global akzeptiert und aufgenommen werden wird.

Auch Chemikalien mit Langzeitrisiken werden gekennzeichnet, und wir konnten erreichen, dass es eine sinnvolle und konsistente Kennzeichnung von Mischungen gibt. Denn da gab es bisher eine Regulierungslücke.

Es ist auch gelungen − die Kollegen haben es schon gesagt −, die Bedenken von insbesondere kleinen Produzenten von ätherischen Ölen angemessen zu berücksichtigen, ohne dabei Abstriche am Gesundheitsschutz zu machen. Wir schließen die Schlupflöcher der bisherigen Verordnung bei Onlineverkäufen, bei Nachfüllstationen.

Und rundherum muss ich sagen, meine Damen und Herren, mit dieser Verordnung zeigen wir: Europa nimmt die Gesundheit seiner Bürgerinnen und Bürger und die Gefahren, die von Chemikalien ausgehen können, ernst. Ich vertraue darauf, dass auch die anderen Bestandteile der Chemikalienstrategie für Nachhaltigkeit noch in dieser Legislaturperiode vorgelegt werden.

Liebe Maria, ich glaube, wir werden in den Verhandlungen mit dem Rat der Mitgliedstaaten ebenfalls zu einem guten Ergebnis kommen. Deshalb an dieser Stelle schon mal ganz herzlichen Dank!

  Pietro Fiocchi, a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, siamo tutti d'accordo sulla necessità della revisione del regolamento CLP, però ci sono alcuni punti, e mi rivolgo al Commissario.

Uno: l'obbligo di mettere tutti i warning nella lingua del paese di destinazione. Perché, invece di prevedere gli atti delegati della Commissione per usare il QR code, non lo facciamo subito nel regolamento usando il QR code, in modo che possiamo passare tutte le informazioni in tutte le lingue che vogliamo, di qualsiasi densità e volume?

Poi, c'è un problema sulle sostanze composte, nel senso che in alcuni casi non ci sono i metodi scientifici di determinazione della pericolosità per la salute umana.

Infine, i caratteri grandi. I caratteri grandi: bellissimo, così sono più leggibili, ma ricordiamoci che vanno in contrasto con la legge sul packaging, perché andare dal font size 10 al font size 12 vuol dire il 20 % in più di uso di carta e di plastica, in contrasto con la direttiva sul packaging. Pertanto, chi ha scritto alcune di queste regole non ha mai lavorato un giorno in fabbrica e non ha mai parlato con gli utenti finali, che, tra l'altro, dubito leggeranno tutti questi warning.

  Danilo Oscar Lancini, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, riconosciamo l'importanza della revisione del regolamento CLP, ma riteniamo alcune disposizioni del testo molto problematiche per le nostre industrie. Per questo motivo, con i colleghi parlamentari dei partiti che costituiscono il governo italiano, abbiamo presentato emendamenti che correggono le parti più critiche.

Al contempo, non posso tacere davanti ai comportamenti di associazioni che dovrebbero rappresentare gli interessi del settore produttivo e invece fanno politica. Invero, CEFIC ha fatto retromarcia sulle priorità proposte per il voto in plenaria a causa del supporto del gruppo ID a tali istanze. Comportamenti simili sono stati attuati anche da AISE, che improvvisamente ha deciso di abbandonarne alcune.

È questo che le imprese si meritano da voi? Lasciate la politica a chi è democraticamente eletto. Questo atteggiamento tradisce il mandato conferitovi dal mondo produttivo, composto anche dalle piccole e medie imprese, a cui nulla importa che parte di questi parlamentari italiani siano anche del gruppo ID. Sono questi comportamenti che tutelano imprese e lavoratori? Ribadisco: noi siamo aperti al dialogo e lo riteniamo uno dei punti fondamentali del nostro lavoro.

  Anja Hazekamp, namens de Fractie The Left. – Voorzitter, al jaren vechten heel veel mensen tegen chemische fabrieken als Chemours en 3M. Fabrieken die zeer schadelijke gifstoffen produceren die nooit meer uit het milieu zullen verdwijnen en die een heel grote bedreiging vormen voor onze gezondheid. Maar er is hoop: we zien kleine stappen om het gevaar van deze fabrieken in te dammen. Vorige week besloot de rechter dat Chemours aansprakelijk is voor de milieuschade die vier gemeenten rondom de fabriek hebben geleden door gevaarlijke PFAS.

Ook met deze wetswijziging, waaraan we het afgelopen half jaar hard hebben gewerkt, zetten we concrete stappen om mens, dier en milieu te beschermen. Voortaan moeten hormoonverstoorders en PFAS op het etiket vermeld worden en duidelijk leesbaar zijn voor de gebruikers. Ik ben dan ook verbaasd dat de lobby van de chemische industrie weer parlementariërs bereid heeft gevonden om te voorkomen dat gebruikers goed worden geïnformeerd. Ik hoop dat morgen iedereen met gezond verstand stemt.

En dan nog een ander punt. Ontzettend veel dieren worden toegetakeld en gedood door de chemische industrie voor zinloze dierproeven. Ik ben blij dat we ook op dit belangrijke onderwerp vooruitgang boeken. We verplichten dat er alternatieve testmethoden gebruikt en gepromoot moeten worden en chemicaliën die waar dan ook ter wereld op primaten getest worden, mogen in Europa niet meer worden toegelaten.

Daarnaast is het belangrijk dat we milieuclaims in advertenties voor gevaarlijke stoffen en mengsels daarvan verbieden. Zo maken we een eind aan greenwashing door Shell, Bayer en hun giftige vrienden.

Ik eindig met een vraag aan de Commissie: u heeft nog andere wetsvoorstellen beloofd om gevaarlijk gif aan banden te leggen, zoals Reach, een exportverbod voor gevaarlijk landbouwgif en een verbod op alle PFAS. Wanneer gaat u mens, dier en milieu echt beschermen en komt u met deze voorstellen? Een datum alstublieft.

  Радан Кънев (PPE). – Г-н Председател, г-н Комисар, на първо място искам да благодаря сърдечно на докладчика Мария Спираки за работата, за разбирането, за конструктивния и консенсусен подход по този доклад. На второ място, да благодаря на всички тези колеги от България, Гърция, Испания, Италия, Франция, от всички парламентарни групи в тази зала, благодарение на които етеричните масла бяха временно изключени от обхвата на регламента. Специални поздрави за колегата Андрей Новаков от България, който по много уважителни причини отсъства от настоящия дебат.

Искам обаче също така да призова в утрешния ден да подкрепите измененията, по силата на които етеричните масла да бъдат категорично и окончателно изключени от списъка на опасните вещества и от предупрежденията за опасни вещества при етикетирането на продукти. Не защото това е интересът на производителите на етерични масла. Не защото в моята държава България производството на етерични масла е доходоносен поминък за хиляди семейства и традиционен поминък за хиляди семейства от повече от столетие. А защото просто те не са опасни вещества. Етеричните масла, извлечени по екологичен начин, по естествен път от растителни продукти, са тъкмо обратното. Това са полезни вещества, които присъстват в нашата грижа за здравето на гражданите, а не в рисковете за това здраве.

  Irène Tolleret (Renew). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, tout d’abord, nous pouvons tous nous réjouir de cette nouvelle législation qui a pour but de protéger la santé humaine et l’environnement. Il faut cependant garder à l’esprit le principe de proportionnalité. Les produits d’origine botanique comme les huiles essentielles méritent un traitement à part pour les distinguer des produits issus de la pétrochimie.

En voulant régler le problème des substances pétrochimiques, il ne faudrait pas que cette révision de la législation cause un préjudice inutile aux cultivateurs de plantes aromatiques et aux autres acteurs de la chaîne. Il s’agit d’un secteur majoritairement artisanal, basé sur une filière composée de petits agriculteurs, de petits producteurs qui jouent un rôle extrêmement important dans le maintien de la biodiversité. J’aimerais souligner que, rien qu’en France, la filière de la lavande et du lavandin génère à elle seule plus de 9 000 emplois directs et 17 000 emplois indirects. À côté de cette filière se développent d’autres secteurs qui font vivre les zones rurales avec le miel, le tourisme.

Je vous demande donc de soutenir une dérogation pour les substances d’origine botanique afin de permettre de garder leur système actuel de classification. Il ne s’agit pas de les exempter, mais de tenir compte de leur spécificité et, ce faisant, de garder nos magnifiques paysages de Provence avec ces champs de lavande, avec cette vallée de la rose, avec ces odeurs, ça sent bon, ce sont des beaux produits. C’est notre patrimoine immatériel, agricole, commun, européen.

Catch-the-eye procedure

  Цветелина Пенкова (S&D). – Г-н Председател, г-жо Комисар, розовото масло е едно от съкровищата на България. То се използва в козметиката, медицината и парфюмерията. Неговата структура и уникален аромат го отличават. Днес, благодарение на розовото масло, България е световен лидер в производството на етерични масла. Важно е да отбележим, че не всички етерични масла са еднакви. Българското розово масло е единствено и неповторимо. То не само не е опасно, а напротив - изключително полезно е за здравето. Това е доказано със стотици проучвания на независими организации и е признато от Световната здравна организация и от ЮНЕСКО World Intangible Cultural Heritage.

От изключително значение е изменението на Регламента за класифициране, етикиране и опаковане на вещества и смеси да гарантира правната стабилност и регулаторната предвидимост. Ние не бива да допускаме ненужни тежести от свръхрегулация или неправилно регулиране на отрасли, уникални за някои региони в Европейския съюз. Затова ви призовавам да защитите един от символите на Съюза, да защитите символа на България.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)

  Μαργαρίτης Σχοινάς, Αντιπρόεδρος της Επιτροπής. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, ευχαριστώ τις κυρίες και κυρίους βουλευτές για την πολύ ενδιαφέρουσα και πλούσια συζήτηση για όλα τα σημεία ουσίας που αφορούν την καινούργια πρόταση κανονισμού. Και πάλι συγχαρητήρια στην εισηγήτρια, Μαρία Σπυράκη.

Κάλυψα πάρα πολλά θέματα στην εισαγωγική μου ομιλία. Δεν θα ήθελα να τα επαναλάβω εδώ. Αλλά θα ήθελα να διαβεβαιώσω και να καθησυχάσω τους ευρωβουλευτές ότι η Επιτροπή αποδίδει ιδιαίτερη σημασία στις ανησυχίες τους για τα περίφημα essential oils.

  Μαρία Σπυράκη, Εισηγήτρια. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, αγαπητέ Μαργαρίτη, ευχαριστώ πάρα πολύ για την υποστήριξη από την πλευρά της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής.

Allow me to switch in English because I owe a clarification concerning the issue of essential oil and please note it because it is important. According to the text we have already voted on in the ENVI Committee, we reached an agreement on the essential oils that the Article 5(3) related to MOCs, which means mixtures, shall not apply – I repeat, shall not apply – to substances containing more than one constituent of renewable botanical origin that are not chemically or genetically modified. By this exclusion – and I repeat the wording, it is an exclusion of the essential oils – we reinforce the sector based mainly on agriculture and SMEs, ensuring safety and sustainability as the main pillars of the production.

As already the Vice-President has said, I have visited Kazanlak, which is in Bulgaria, I have also visited Guadalajara, which is in Spain, and I explained to the producers that we are here to protect their jobs and not to destroy their lives.

While going on to the next question, which is the articles that we will vote for tomorrow in the amendments, I will currently ask you to support three amendments which are now gathering the support from various groups consisting the so-called ‘von der Leyen alliance’. The first, number 101, is referred to Article 37(2) regarding the grouping of substances, we propose an alignment with the REACH Regulation, specifying clear certificate criteria which are needed. The second is number 102. The second amendment is related to the reference to the use of the environmental claims in Article 48(2a). This amendment that had been adopted by the ENVI Committee prohibited the use of environmental claims for all CLP-classified substances and mixtures. Now, to mitigate the concerns raised by various stakeholders, we propose to limit this prohibition to the most severe hazard classes, which is needed. And the third one we support is another important amendment regarding the child-resistant fastening. This aims to extend the requirement for a child-resistant fastening to such substances or mixtures which have extreme pH and are classified as serious eye damage category.

Concluding, as the rapporteur of this report, I invite you all to vote in favour of these amendments and thus give me a strong mandate to negotiate in the trilogue with the Council and the Commission.

  President. – The debate is closed. The vote will be held tomorrow, Wednesday 4 October.