MARKETING AND USE OF AZOCOLOURANTS
(20847)
14251/99
COM(99) 620
|
Draft Directive amending for the nineteenth time Council Directive 76/769/EEC relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations (azocolourants).
|
| Legal base: |
Article 95 EC; co-decision; qualified majority voting
|
| |
| Document originated:
| 10 December 1999 |
| Forwarded to the Council:
| 13 December 1999 |
| Deposited in Parliament:
| 17 January 2000 |
| Department: |
Environment, Transport and the Regions
|
| Basis of consideration:
| EM of 26 January 2000 |
| Previous Committee Report:
| None |
| To be discussed in Council:
| After receipt of European Parliament's opinion
|
| Committee's assessment:
| Politically important |
| Committee's decision:
| Cleared; but further information requested
|
Background
14.1 Azocolourants are used to dye materials,
textiles, leather, ink and other products, and are subdivided
into azo(pigments) and azodyes. The latter can break down under
particular conditions to form amines, some of which are carcinogenic,
and this in turn can create health risks, particularly for workers
involved in the dyeing process, but also for consumers. Consequently,
although some Member States have already taken national action
to ban the dyes in question, and although their use has effectively
been stopped in the rest of the Community through voluntary action
by industry, the Commission believes that legislative action should
now be taken at Community level. It is therefore proposing to
introduce a ban on the marketing and use of those azodyes which
can break down into one of a list of 21 carcinogenic amines.
The Government's view
14.2 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 26
January 2000, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Lord
Whitty) says that the ban is justified in terms of the advice
of the Community's Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity
and the Environment (CSTEE), and is strongly supported by the
dyestuffs industry as it consolidates their voluntary action.
The Government therefore supports the aim of the proposal. However,
the Minister goes on to register one procedural reservation, in
that he says eight of the 21 amines listed in the proposal have
yet to be formally classified as carcinogens under what he calls
the "well-established regulatory procedures" of the
Community system. Consequently, the UK will seek to have the eight
unclassified amines withdrawn from the proposal and submitted
for urgent review (as indeed appears to have already been the
case with seven of them); the suggestion then is that any newly-classified
amines could be included in the ban via a technical adaptation
of the Directive. At the same time, the Minister say that "the
Government's overall approach to the proposal will however be
guided by the need to secure high levels of protection for workers
and consumers".
14.3 The Minister also says that a Regulatory
Impact Assessment is currently under preparation, but that initial
assessments indicate that both the costs and benefits of the proposal
are likely to be low, as industry has long anticipated the measure
and is already using substitutes.
Conclusion
14.4 Given the apparent risks which can
arise from the use of these dyes, this proposal is to be welcomed,
even though it would appear in the main to consolidate action
already taken voluntarily. We are therefore clearing it.
14.5 However, we would be concerned if
the UK's quite proper wish to ensure that the correct carcinogenic
classification procedures have been followed were to lead to a
delay in applying these restrictions to substances which the CSTEE
appears to have identified as carrying a risk. Nor are we clear
to what extent our concern would in practice be met by the Minister's
statement that the Government's overall approach to the proposal
will " be guided by the need to secure high levels of protection
for workers and consumers". We would therefore welcome clarification
from him on these two points. Also, since he has observed that
early indications suggest this dossier is not a priority for the
Portuguese Presidency, we would like to know whether the Government
intends to press the Presidency to bring forward discussions on
it.
|
