On March 7, the European Commission adopted new regulations that will allow for changes to the maximum residue limits for pesticides because of environmental concerns. This is a major departure from the internationally recognized scientific approach to establishing maximum residue limits.
If left unchallenged, this unilateral and unprecedented decision by Europe will have a significant negative impact on how Canada and other agricultural producers around the world operate within their borders and on how agricultural products are marketed globally.
As the name suggests, MRLs are the maximum allowable amount of pesticide residue that can remain on a crop when the product is used according to the approved label directions. MRLs are established following rigorous safety assessments by competent national authorities.
In Canada, Health Canada is in charge of completing these assessments and setting Canadian MRLs. There is an international standard-setting organization called the Codex Alimentarius Commission, Codex, for short, which sets scientifically based, internationally agreed upon standards to facilitate trade. Like Canada, the EU is a member of Codex, but their recent regulatory changes directly contradict the international consensus on MRLs.
The EU has openly stated that they are trying to create a level playing field for their farmers. In other words, if they ban a pesticide in the EU, regardless of the reason, they want to make sure that none of their trading partners have access to it either. This unilateral approach disregards the rigorous scientific process that is used to evaluate pesticides and set MRLs and is a direct effort by Europe to impose its domestic policies on countries like Canada.
Canadian farmers are faced with enormous challenges in growing more food more sustainably to feed Canadians and the world. We cannot allow ideologically driven approaches out of Europe to dictate which tools and technologies Canadian farmers have access to. Both CETA and the World Trade Organization call for any regulatory measures to be based on science and forbid unjustified barriers to trade. It is our view that by adopting this regulation, the EU is not meeting its trade obligations.