An influential cross-party committee of MPs has called the government's inaction over questions surrounding neonicotinoid insecticides "extraordinarily complacent" and urged Defra to adopt a precautionary approach in the face of evidence that the chemicals are harming pollinating insects, such as bees.

image expired

In the wake of a review of Defra's response to the neonicotinoid issue, the Environmental Audit Committee demanded the department introduce a "precautionary moratorium on three pesticides linked to the decline of pollinators." In line with calls made by the European Commission in January, EAC said imidacloprid, clothianidin and TMX must be banned from use on flowering crops attractive to pollinating insects.

In January, EU health watchdog EFSA recommended that the bloc introduce a moratorium on the pesticides following an investigation. Prior to EFSA's pronouncement, over 30 peer-reviewed studies had highlighted risks to insect pollinators since 2009, including a number published in the prestigious journals Science and Nature.

Insect populations are being hit by worrying declines in a number of global regions. Two-thirds of wild insect pollinator species - such as bumblebees, hoverflies, butterflies, carrion flies, beetles, midges and moths - have suffered population declines in the UK.  Managed honeybees have also experienced unusually high mortality rates, decreased fertility, increased susceptibility to disease and the loss of hives, though impacts on honey bee populations are better understood; as a commercial insect, research has tended to focus on honey bee health.

Although researchers acknowledge that disease, habitat loss and climate change are all taking their toll, they suggest that bees are suffering "death from a thousand cuts," with neonicotinoids, which are the most widely used insecticides worldwide, accounting for 24 percent of the pesticide market, serving at the very least to weaken the resilience of bees and other insects.

Industry admits risk assessment is inadequate

Even the NFU in Britain, which opposes the EU moratorium, admitted to the Environmental Audit Committee, "It is very well known that the current pesticide risk assessment systems for bees were not developed to assess systemic pesticides." The pesticides, most commonly used as seed treatments, which protect the whole plant, are used on oilseed rape, cereals, maize, sugar beet and greenhouse crops.

On Friday, releasing a report on the government's approach to pesticide regulation and pollinator health, EAC chair Joan Walley said, "Defra seems to be taking an extraordinarily complacent approach to protecting bees given the vital free service that pollinators provide to our economy. If farmers had to pollinate fruit and vegetables without the help of insects it would cost hundreds of millions of pounds and we would all be stung by rising food prices. Defra Ministers have refused to back EU efforts to protect pollinators and can't even come up with a convincing plan to encourage bee-friendly farming in the UK."

The EAC chair also slammed the Government's National Action Plan on pesticides as "a missed opportunity." Upon its muted release in early March, Friends of the Earth's Paul de Zylva lambasted the "inaction plan" and the government's "slow and arcane" approach to pesticide regulation.

Stoke MP Ms Walley also criticised the plan; "Clearer targets are needed to reduce reliance on pesticides as far as possible. And Integrated Pest Management – which emphasizes alternatives to pesticides, but does not preclude their use – should be made the central principle of the plan."

Returning to the issue of neonicotinoids, she concluded, "More research is needed to monitor pollinator populations and establish the impact that particular pesticides are having, but Defra must not use this as an excuse to avoid urgent precautionary action."

Agchem giants accused of muddying water

Neonicotinoids are manufactured in the EU by Bayer CropSciences and Syngenta, based in Germany and the UK. These two countries have so far stalled attempts to negotiate a moratorium. The companies flatly deny that their products, when used correctly, cause harm to bees and other wild pollinators.

In its report, EAC states that pesticide manufacturers have claimed studies linking their products to bee decline are flawed or inconclusive, or blamed other factors such as the Varroa mite for bee decline. However, although the agrochemical industry claims to have studied the environmental effects of pesticides, most industry data is kept secret on grounds of commercial confidentiality. The report warns that this lack of transparency is hindering wider understanding and EAC MPs called on the industry to place the results of its trials and studies in the public domain "so that they can be subjected to open academic scrutiny." 

Joan Walley MP added upon the report's release, "Pesticide companies often try to pick holes in studies linking their products to bee decline, but when pushed to publish their own research and safety studies they hide behind claims of commercial sensitivity. The industry must open itself to greater academic scrutiny if it wants to justify its continued opposition to the precautionary protection of pollinators."

Last week, Bayer and Syngenta pledged to work together to create an 'action plan' on neonicotinoid use in a bid to obviate EU restrictions. Paul de Zylva responded to the companies' 'bee health plan', "Even agri-chemical firms agree bees are in severe danger, but their vested interests in keeping pesticides on the market are clouding their vision. Any Bee Action Plan will fail unless it addresses all causes of bee decline and backs the EC's proposed ban on neonicotinoids. The 170 MPs already backing a Bee Action Plan must not be distracted by this cynical proposal." 

On 15th January, one day before EFSA released the results of its review on neonicotinoids, an industry-funded report claimed that the chemicals were worth £630million to farmers in the UK alone. However, the report's findings were questioned.

Commenting on its release, Soil Association Policy Director Peter Melchett said that, on balance, economic evidence still supports a ban on the pesticides. He said, "As this report was funded by Bayer Crop Sciences and Syngenta, it was probably unlikely to conclude that neonicotinoids should be banned. On the one hand, the chemical companies say we risk the additional costs to farmers amounting to £630 million. On the other, the possible cost of losing pollinating insects is thought to be worth three times as much to UK farmers."

The governments of France, Germany, Italy and Slovenia have already suspended the use of certain neonicotinoids. 

Flying in the face of mounting scientific evidence, the possibility that the Commission will override EU negotiations and implement a ban and now EAC's damning report, Defra continues reject calls for a precautionary approach. In response to the EAC report, a spokesperson maintained that a "major new field study" is needed and said that any "decisions on neonicotinoids must be based on sound scientific evidence, rather than rushing into a knee-jerk ban based on inconclusive studies."

Ms Walley said on Friday, "We believe that the weight of scientific evidence now warrants precautionary action, so we are calling for a moratorium on pesticides linked to bee decline to be introduced by January 1 next year. This would allow farmers to use treated seeds which have already been bought for the coming growing season." She also called for the use of the chemicals in non-professional products to be banned outright, to create "urban safe havens" for bees and other pollinators.