The European Commission is on a roll. After proposing to destroy Europe’s corporate sustainability law, they now want to attack various food laws, including on pesticide protection.
Stripping away protection against toxic pesticides
The European Commission is planning a major overhaul of the rules designed to protect people and the environment from pesticides. A leaked draft of the proposed legislation shows it would dismantle the system that keeps these harmful chemicals out of our food, water, and ecosystems. These changes are part of a broader effort to bow to the demands of agribusiness, prioritizing short-term profits over public health and environmental safety.
Trampling on democratic rules, the Commission has conducted neither an impact assessment nor a public consultation, both of which would normally be required for a proposal of this kind.
What’s in the works?
The European Commission is planning no less than lifetime authorisation for pesticides. That means no more mandatory regular re-evaluations! Most pesticides would no longer need to be reassessed every 10 to 15 years to take into account new scientific studies on their safety, and they could remain approved indefinitely. Only a small number of the most toxic substances, which are already on their way of being phased out, would continue to undergo periodic safety reviews
Under the new rules, EU member countries would also no longer need to consider the latest independent scientific studies before approving pesticide products. These studies are crucial for spotting long-term risks and complementing gaps in the regulatory system. Without them, pesticide approvals would be largely controlled by industry, undermining the precautionary principle and public trust just when independent oversight is most needed.
As if it weren’t enough, the Commission also wants to double the period during which highly toxic pesticides can still be sold after being banned to protect our health or the environment. Instead of 1.5 years, citizens could be exposed to these chemicals for up to 3 years.
This would seriously weaken Europe’s chemical safeguards at a time when science, public concern, and the health and biodiversity crises call for stronger, not weaker, protection.
What does it mean for our food and the environment?
Regular re-evaluations of pesticides are the only times when chemical companies are required to fully update safety information, take new scientific evidence into account, and prove that their products still comply with EU standards.
If these reviews were removed, it would have wide-ranging and serious consequences:
Dangerous pesticides left unchecked
The EU’s system for re-evaluating pesticides has repeatedly uncovered serious harms years after a pesticide was first approved. Without these reviews, dangerous chemicals could stay on the market indefinitely.
For example:
- Neonicotinoids. These were initially approved long before anyone realized their devastating impact on bees. Repeated scientific studies eventually led the EU to impose strict restrictions in 2013, leading to a ban for outdoor use of three neonicotinoids by 2018–2020.
- Chlorpyrifos. It has been used for decades without anyone recognizing its harmful effects on children’s brain development. Only after new research emerged did the EU finally ban it in 2020.
- Mancozeb. It stayed legal for more than 50 years, as early evaluations missed its risks to hormones, reproduction, and the nervous system. These dangers were confirmed through later scientific studies, leading to a ban in 2021.
- Flufenacet. Allowed for over 20 years, new safety data revealed it disrupts hormones in humans and wildlife and breaks down into a persistent chemical called TFA (trifluoroacetic acid), which now shows up in tap water across Europe. This led to a ban in 2024.
These examples show why regular pesticide re-evaluations are essential: they are the only way to catch long-term harms that weren’t known when a product was first approved.
Take Acetamiprid, the last widely approved neonicotinoid in the EU, which has been linked to developmental harm in the brain. Under the new rules proposed by the Commission, this pesticide (and many others) could be allowed to stay on the market indefinitely, even as new evidence continues to raise serious concerns.
A race to the bottom
If older pesticides are no longer required to undergo mandatory re-evaluation, keeping them on the market becomes cheaper than developing safer alternatives. Rather than promoting safer innovations or encouraging farmers to work with nature to manage pests, weeds, and plant diseases, the proposal risks trapping them in continued reliance on harmful chemical products.
How would scaling back pesticide protections affect the health of farmers and nearby communities?
Farmers and farm workers are often the first victims of pesticide use, with many developing cancers, neurological diseases like Parkinson’s, and other serious health problems linked to chemical exposure. Even when they use protective equipment, studies show they remain at risk.
It’s not only farmers who are affected: families and neighbours are exposed to drifting chemicals, making pesticide use a wider community health issue. Many farmers are reluctant to speak out, and the dangers of pesticides remain a largely taboo topic.
Allowing toxic pesticides to remain on the market unchecked will put farmers and rural communities at serious risk, threatening their health and wellbeing.
Can we still trust that drinking water is safe?
Pesticides are widespread in European water. Surveys show that 22% of rivers and lakes have levels above safety thresholds, and studies in countries like the Netherlands, Denmark, and Ireland found pesticides in drinking water exceeding safety limits. While this clearly calls for stronger safeguards to protect our water and environment, the Commission is instead proposing to weaken existing protections.
A rearguard move that puts agribusiness profits before our future
The harms of pesticides are well known: they wipe out pollinators like bees and butterflies, which are essential for our food; they contribute to rising chronic diseases such as cancer and Parkinson’s; and farmers and rural communities face the highest exposure and greatest health risks.If the worrying proposal in the pipeline goes ahead, it will be a slap in the face to the more than 1.1 million citizens across Europe who called on the EU to end pesticide use. They expect the EU to protect their health, not prioritize industry profits over their safety.
