The government is today considering a request from pesticide manufacturer Syngenta to allow planting of 186,000Ha of oilseed rape treated with neonicotinoid pesticides, which were made subject to tight restrictions by the European Commission in December.

The appeal for a 'derogation' from the EU restrictions on Syngenta's Cruiser OSR product, made in light of mounting evidence of neonicotinoids' impact on the environment and pollinating insects in particular, was made by the company itself. If passed, it would allow for 30 percent of the traditionally grown OSR area to be treated with its products.  

The derogation would apply in areas experiencing high flea beetle pressure, as the applicant claims there are no alternative means of combating these pests.

Although government pesticide advisors are said to be supportive of the request, a Defra spokesperson said the matter is still under consideration and so could not comment.

The government response is likely to be influenced by the publication yesterday of findings from a four year study by an IUCN-appointed task force, which found that neonicotinoids and other systemic insecticides are harmful, not just to bees, but to creatures on virtually every level of the ecosystem.

Commenting on the findings of the Task Force on Systemic Pesticides, NFU Vice President Guy Smith said that no conclusions could be drawn until the experts' full report is released next month, but added, "Even so, this has been untimely given our recent launch of Healthy Harvest, a campaign which intends to safeguard crop and plant protection products – the spin that has been created by the media without the full knowledge of the science behind the bold conclusions [on neonicotinoids] has created an imbalanced argument. There's a very real risk that complex regulatory issues will be over simplified and sensationalised to the detriment of both productive agriculture, but also for the wider environment.

"Nonetheless, we will continue to lobby for evidence-based decisions in terms of regulation as well as more research and development of new and safe active ingredients of pesticides to support farmers and growers in the UK."

The NFU vice-president's appeal to "evidence and sound science" is not the first time a complex issue has been framed as a question of 'science versus emotion' in recent days; USDA Secretary Tom Vislack was roundly criticised last week for suggesting EU restrictions on hormone treated meats and certain genetically modified crops have no scientific basis. In fact, as with the neonicotinoid restrictions, these measures are grounded in the precautionary principle, which is enshrined in European law.

Unlike the United States, European laws dictate that, where evidence is incomplete, it is the responsibility of a party wishing to take a contested action to demonstrate that it is not harmful, rather than of those investigating it. Such measures are especially useful in cases like GM crops or pesticides where intellectual property and trade secrets can interfere with independent research.     

Soil Association policy officer Louise Payton commented on Syngenta's request on Wednesday, "This is madness considering that this request to use neonicotinoids came on the same day that a worldwide analysis of over 800 studies was published, indicating that neonicotinoid pesticides are unsafe for wildlife."

Payton continued, "This overwhelming scientific evidence of the dangers of neonicotinoids follows a pattern. Classes of pesticides, previously claimed to be safe, are regularly found to be dangerous and subsequently banned. Farming urgently needs to [manage] pests and benefit wildlife without the use of dangerous pesticides."

A decision from the Cabinet on the derogation is expected early next week.