A planned vote on the future of the world’s most widely used herbicide in the European union has been delayed again in light of persistent concerns over its safety. Member state representatives on the European Council’s Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed were set to vote on reapproval terms for glyphosate, the current license for which expires in June.

This follows the first postponement in March, when member state ministers were expected to wave through the Commission’s plans to relicense glyphosate for 15 years. However, ahead of the vote France’s environment minister Segolene Royale announced that the French government would vote against approval. This was followed by statements from the governments of Germany, the Netherlands, Italy and Sweden declaring that they would vote against reauthorisation unless the vote was postponed until health concerns had been cleared up.

Last year, the World Health Organisation’s cancer research arm IARC classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen. Later in the year, Commission watchdog EFSA released an opinion in which it stated glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic and recommended increasing the threshold for glyphosate residues in the EU. This sparked a spat between scientists from the two organisations and led to scrutiny of EFSA’s work - which looked at the glyphosate compound in isolation, whereas IARC examined glyphosate products in solutions, as they are found on the market - and led to calls for greater transparency from the watchdog.

On Thursday, French minister Segolene Royale said in a statement, "In accordance with my announcement of 4 March, France remains opposed to the re-approval of glyphosate for the market for 9 years.” Royale continued, “I have been in contact with my counterparts in other European countries. The ministers for other countries, notably Germany, Italy, Sweden, Austria and Portugal have indicated they would vote against the Commission’s proposal or abstain.”

The French environment minister said France had taken its stance in light of the IARC findings on glyphosate. France has banned the sale of glyphosate to non-professionals and stopped its use in parks and public spaces.

Germany had said it would abstain in voting because the country’s farm and environment ministers belong to different parties, with different views on the debate, and no common position could be reached.

The revised proposal put up for debate by the Commission, following a vote in the European Parliament last month, was abandoned on Thursday after the EU executive failed to secure the required majority among EU governments. Parliamentarians who had seen the proposal were highly critical of the Commission’s plans, which they said failed to acknowledge the ongoing concerns about glyphosate’s safety or MEPs’ resolution of last month agreeing that sales of the herbicide should be restricted to professional users only, and that the practice of using glyphosate as a desiccant on crops before harvest should be banned.  

However, according to EU sources, the Commission’s revised proposal would have banned some co-formulants, which evidence suggests increases any health risks associated with glyphosate.   

Commenting on the development on Thursday, EU Greens’ environment and food safety spokesperson Bart Staes said, "This latest postponement is a sign that the significant opposition to reapproving glyphosate is being taken seriously by key EU governments. It is clear that the EU Commission and the agro-chemical industry were hell-bent on bulldozing through the approval of glyphosate for unrestricted use for a long timeframe but thankfully this push has been headed off for now. We hope this postponement will convince more EU governments to join in opposing the approval of this controversial substance and, at the very least, to proactively propose comprehensive restrictions on its use.

"The Commission cannot keep coming back with proposals that do not address the concerns with glyphosate. Instead, it needs to finally recognise that there are major problems and legislate for this. Only last month, the European Parliament voted to highlight its concerns with glyphosate and adopted a resolution opposing approval of glyphosate for most of its uses. MEPs voted to oppose the approval of glyphosate in agriculture where there are alternative methods for weed control, in the pre-harvest stage, in public parks and playgrounds and for hobby gardeners. EU governments should now take this on board both in terms of the pending EU approval but also at national level, where member states can introduce their own bans or restrictions, as France has already indicated it will do.”

Staes, who is MEP for Flanders in Belgium, added, ”While the agro-chemical lobby is desperately trying to spin it otherwise, the finding by the WHO'S IARC that glyphosate is probably carcinogenic to humans is of major concern. This, combined with the established negative impacts on the environment, should be leading to a global moratorium on its use."

Responding late on Thursday, NFU Vice President Guy Smith said, “Like most farmers who use glyphosate regularly, I am nothing short of exasperated as to why this key herbicide cannot simply and quickly be given the reauthorisation that has been recommended by EFSA - the appropriate EU scientific body.  Some member states in the committee are prevaricating and wasting time when they could be taking decisions based on scientific evidence.  Glyphosate is a pesticide which allows farmers to combat weeds while supporting cultivation methods that can preserve good soil structure.  There is no sense behind this delay and we look to Member States to support an evidence-based, full re-approval at the earliest possible opportunity.”

In their resolution last month, MEPs appealed to the Commission to err on the side of caution and abide by the precautionary principle in its decision making; in theory, the scientific principle underpins EU environment and public health legislation. It now remains to be seen whether a vote will take place in the coming weeks or whether the European Commission will be required to cast the deciding vote.