| Author (Person) | Carstens, Karen |
|---|---|
| Series Title | European Voice |
| Series Details | Vol.10, No.12, 1.4.04 |
| Publication Date | 01/04/2004 |
| Content Type | News |
|
Date: 01/04/04 EUROCRATS are not exactly quaking at the thought of a Washington-led international assault on the EU's draft REACH chemicals policy overhaul. The controversial two-years-in-the making plan, jointly drawn up by the European Commission's environment and enterprise directorates, came under heavy fire from both industry and governments before it was finally unveiled by the EU executive last October. But the proposal was watered down enough via last-minute modifications - aimed at reducing the complexity and cost of implementation - to make it palatable to most EU governments, although hefty criticism from groups, such as EU employers' association Unice and the German chemicals industry, persists. The Bush administration in the US has been another longtime foe of the proposed REACH system to register, evaluate and authorize thousands of chemicals. US Secretary of State Colin Powell, it has emerged, sent a confidential cable in March to American diplomats in the 15 current member states and the ten accession countries, directing them to lobby governments against the controversial chemicals policy overhaul. "The government continues to be concerned that the proposals will create a costly, disproportionately burdensome and complex regulatory system, which could prove difficult, if not unworkable, in its implementation. US exports in most industrial sectors, totalling tens of billions of dollars, would be affected by the new policy," Powell states in the document. In addition to Powell's communiqué, the US has spearheaded an attack within the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) coalition of countries. Key EU trading partners, including the US, Canada, Mexico, Australia, Japan, China, Indonesia, South Korea, Malaysia and other members of the regional organization, have in a joint statement sent in March to the Commission expressed "serious concern" over REACH. They describe the plans as "overly expansive, burdensome and costly". The greatest negative impact would be felt by developing economies and small- and medium-sized enterprises, APEC warns. Significantly, in view of the changes made last autumn, APEC also stresses that it remains concerned over the directive's economic and trade impacts. REACH, it charges, is likely to lead to bias in favour of EU suppliers that would breach a World Trade Organization (WTO) agreement on technical barriers to trade. Such concerns were expressed by the US, China, Japan, Canada, Chile, Thailand and Taipei representatives at a 24 March meeting of the WTO 'technical barriers to trade committee'. One WTO official reportedly said the organization doesn't know how industry should interpret the proposal, which would see some 30,000 chemicals registered in Europe over the next 11 years. The EU officially notified the plan to the WTO on 29 January and perturbed trade parties now have until 21 June to raise their concerns in that forum. But Ewa Hedlund, spokeswoman for Environment Commissioner Margot Wallström, dismissed the APEC statement as just "one of many" that continue to pour into the Commission - both positive and negative - on the REACH proposal. "We've heard all this before," she said. "It's not a barrier to trade at all. "I don't think there is any proposal in this Commission that has been so well prepared," she added. After months of consulting with a wide range of stakeholders, Hedlund said, EU policymakers came up with a fair compromise taking everyone's concerns into consideration. "We talked to everybody. You have to strike a balance between all of the interests and it is a well-balanced proposal." Moreover, she added: "Of course it's natural during a process like this that there are comments. "And everybody doesn't love everything that the Commission does. That is also normal." The assault by APEC is not causing undue concern in the Commission's environment directorate-general, she claimed, adding that Wallström saw no reason to give it more priority than any other criticism the EU executive has received either before or since. "We feel very safe and very secure with this proposal," said Hedlund, suggesting that the WTO would have a tough time finding any legal loopholes that would reveal it to be in breach of international trade rules. "We have notified it to the WTO and have received no complaints from them yet," she added. "We still think it is a good proposal - so it doesn't really change our view on what we should be doing." Stefan Scheuer, EU policy officer for water and chemicals at the European Environmental Bureau (EEB), was also dismissive of the US-led attack. "It shows a complete lack of understanding in these APEC countries [of REACH]," he said. "We all know this is US-driven, that this is very politically motivated and that the Bush administration has not given the EPA [US Environmental Protection Agency] much leeway in fine-tuning its own chemicals policy." Moreover, both Canadian and US officials and researchers have expressed an interest in the proposals, offering up a few - albeit relatively rare - voices that suggest a REACH-style system could be workable at international level. To this end, the EPA is hosting a conference at the end of this month in Charlottesville, Virginia, to discuss REACH. Both Wallström and Scheuer will be attending. The Swedish commissioner will also be visiting the Toxics Use Reduction Institute at the University of Massachusetts at Lowell and the headquarters of biotech multinational firm Millipore in Billerica, Massachusetts. Millipore - which serves the global life science research, biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries - has made major efforts to find 'good' substitutes for 'bad' chemicals, Hedlund explained. Wallström will be visiting arguably 'pro-REACH' places during her first US trip since the plan was unveiled last autumn, thereby mainly avoiding the critics. But transatlantic trade concerns do not look as though they are going to go away any time soon. America is a key player in APEC - and US business and government sources suggest that it is likely to take an even tougher line over the proposals than the regional grouping. Although it already expressed its concerns during last year's EU consultation on the draft plan, the Bush administration is preparing to issue a new statement by 1 June, sources say. Meanwhile, business groups, such as the United States Council for International Business, are lobbying hard in Washington to make sure the US government takes up a tough position. But, at the same time, there has been some support for the REACH plan, which should bring cheer to Wallström. San Francisco, for instance, has formally adopted a resolution in favour of the draft EU chemicals policy, sending a clear pro-REACH message all the way back to Brussels. |
|
| Source Link | http://www.european-voice.com/ |
| Related Links |
|
| Subject Categories | Business and Industry |
| Countries / Regions | United States |
