This is a subscriber-only article
Crowds of farmers and industry representatives gathered at the recent Croptec show in Peterborough in the UK to hear if referendum promises of less red tape, looser regulations and freedom to devise their own pesticide rules will finally materialise after the UK leaves the regulatory umbrella of the EU.
Will regulations be loosened for growers? Will the use of banned pesticides by the EU be permitted in the UK? Will UK growers have a competitive advantage over the EU and be able to compete on a level playing field with its global competitors?
In the short term at least, the answer appears to be no. This soon became apparent as Chris Hartfield, senior regulatory affairs adviser in the NFU plant health unit, made it clear that post-Brexit, all EU pesticide legislation will be enacted straight into UK law. In addition to this, the UK will continue to maintain a “close alignment” with the EU, for the short to medium term. The length of this alignment is largely dependent on any future trade deals which may be stuck with the EU, he said.
Keeping the good parts
“It’s not all bad. There are some parts of the current EU regulations that we’d like to keep,” Chris remarked as he stated that the UK Chemicals Regulation Division (CRD) will still want to maintain an effective voice and influential role in the EU.
He continued that they also wish to maintain a role in the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organisation (EPPO) as well as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
Chris stated that, while EU pesticide regulation has many failings, there were a number of positive elements which they intend on keeping. These include provisions for pesticide exemptions for minor uses and speciality crops, the emergency approvals/essential use system, continued promotion of IPM, and pesticide application equipment-testing measures.
New UK pesticide programme
There was an acknowledgement that there was significant opportunity to design a new and ambitious pesticide regulation division which maintained a focus on consumer health and environment protection, but was better for UK farmers when compared with the existing EU regulations. It is important not to waste a good crisis.
He said that the efficiency of the UK CRD will be a big advantage to growers, citing the fact that they can process pesticide-related applications much faster than any other EU country. For example, in 2013, the CRD processed 319 out of 364 pesticide applications versus just 17 of the next-closest EU country. He said that in the future, new actives may be processed and approved faster in the UK than the EU.
He thinks that they won’t have to wait years to see these changes after Brexit, and there may be scope to interpret EU policy differently in the short term. For example, in Germany, there are 36 actives available to hop growers but in the UK, there are just 23, despite both being under the same regulatory body.
However, continuing with the hop example, he said that the new post-Brexit pesticide regime will help reduce the gap and level the playing field with the UK’s main competitors, stating that the USA has over 60 actives available to its hop growers.
NI Challenges
Among the many challenges facing the UK pesticide scene post-Brexit, he said that devolution may yet prove a problem. This could be particularly relevant to us. All countries within the UK have, or are capable of having, their own government, which, in theory are free to determine their own pesticide regularity path. However, the most likely scenario he said, is that the whole of the UK will fall under the one regulatory umbrella, similar to today.
This may yet prove to be an issue if Northern Ireland is to remain in regulatory alignment with the EU, particularly when the rest of the UK begins to move away from EU alignment.
Ultimately though, this topic will remain guesswork until the exact terms of any Brexit deal are determined and, at the time of writing, this seems to be as far away as ever.
SHARING OPTIONS: