Profits before health and environment : how the chemical industry is undermining European chemical legislation
"Existing chemicals legislation fails to protect humans and the environment. The EU REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals) chemicals policy was designed to address this problem. However, in the period between the White Paper in 2001 and the Commission’s 2003 proposal, R...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Institution: | ETUI-European Trade Union Institute |
| Format: | TEXT |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Washington
2005
FOE |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.labourline.org/KENTIKA-19138082124919562649-Profits-before-health-and-envi.htm |
| Summary: | "Existing chemicals legislation fails to protect humans and the environment. The EU REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals) chemicals policy was designed to address this problem. However, in the period between the White Paper in 2001 and the Commission’s 2003 proposal, REACH was seriously undermined by Cefic – the European Chemical Industry Council – and its members. This study reveals more closely the difference between public statements of support for REACH made by Cefic and their efforts to wreck REACH even further. Unfortunately, for the sheer benefit of even higher profits, the chemical industry is jeopardising the protection of human health and the environment.
In this study Friends of the Earth Europe surveyed 31 corporate members of Cefic and posed a number of questions related to REACH and the debate surrounding it. The questions dealt with issues such as substitution and phasing-out of chemicals of “very high concern”, consumers’ right to know about chemicals in products that they purchase, substances exported outside the EU and “risk-based prioritisation”.
Only 18 of the 31 companies responded although we had taken efforts to locate the responsible person at each of the companies. 13 companies didn’t even take the effort to provide Friends of the Earth Europe with a formal reply. Of those who replied, the responses were in most cases unsatisfactory: they provided only short letters or a statement without answering most of our questions. Five companies returned identical letters. Only two companies, BP and DuPont, answered all the questions as they were laid out in the questionnaire.
Given the lack of specific responses, our study also looked at company websites for specific information on chemicals and at statements on transparency and sustainability in general." |
|---|---|
| Physical Description: | 39 p. Digital |