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
PDF 101kWORD 16k
17 January 2017
E-000201-17
Question for written answer E-000201-17
to the Commission
Rule 130
Mireille D'Ornano (ENF)

 Subject:  Reasons for the Commission's failure to act on endocrine disrupters
 Answer in writing 

In its edition of 29 November 2016, the French newspaper Le Monde published an opinion piece, supported by about a hundred eminent scientists, condemning the questionable influence of the industry on the Commission’s approach to endocrine disrupters. The scientists maintain that the Commission is being led to play down the dangers of these substances.

Whatever the disease involved, be it breast cancer, cancers of reproductive organs, prostate cancer, brain disorders, diabetes, obesity, or malformations, there are numerous studies pointing to what these scientists call a global health threat. The Commission, however, is refusing to apply the precautionary principle and adopt strict legislation, even though the public health risk is obvious.

1. Is it true that the American authorities are threatening to retaliate against European countries if they consider the legislation on endocrine disrupters to be too strict?

2. Is it true, as was claimed in Le Monde, which had got hold of several internal Commission documents, that the EFSA scientific findings on endocrine disrupters were a foregone conclusion?

Original language of question: FR 
Legal notice - Privacy policy