Prohibition on lead in wetlands and confusion as to how to interpret the Commission’s proposal
23.4.2020
Question for written answer E-002468/2020
to the Commission
Rule 138
Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE)
In response to Written Question No E-000744/2020, the Commission stated that: ‘Stakeholders, including practical operators such as hunting and shooting associations, had the opportunity to contribute to the preparatory work for this possible restriction by 1) responding to the ECHA’s call for evidence to ensure a solid evidence basis for ECHA’s Annex XV dossier; and 2) expressing their views and concerns and providing relevant information in the public consultations on ECHA’s Annex XV dossier and the draft opinion of ECHA’s Committee for Socioeconomic Analysis. The comments made in the consultations (7) were taken into account by ECHA’s scientific committees for their opinion-making in order to ensure that proposed measures are proportionate to the risk posed and take into account the impacts on all stakeholders as well as the benefits on human health and the environment’. ECHA’s opinion was sent to the Commission in August 2018.
- 1.Given that ECHA’s Committee for Socio-economic Analysis (SEAC) highlighted concerns about the comprehensibility of the Ramsar definition of wetlands and the problems associated with a ban on possession, why did the Commission not take SEAC’s opinion into account?
- 2.ECHA’s opinion recommended a 36-month transition period and no buffer zones: on what grounds did the Commission ignore ECHA’s advice?