The draft regulation was made public in June 2022. Since then, it has continued to be attacked by agrochemical lobbies and MEPs from the PPE (right), CRE (conservative right) and ID (far right) parties. Environmental organizations have carried out analysis of the arguments to demonstrate the non-viability of their remarks concerning the objectives of reducing pesticides, the impact on European food sovereignty, the ban on the use of pesticides in sensitive areas, etc. .
🚨 The regulation is currently under discussion in the European Parliament.
On October 9, 2023, there was a first debate and votes in the AGRI Commission which weakened the text.
On October 23, 2023 it was the turn of the ENVI Commission. We must ask the MEPs of this committee to reintroduce into the text the necessary ambition in terms of reducing pesticides and protecting populations and ecosystems! B
etween November 20 and 22, the discussions will take place this time in plenary. Until these dates, we must maintain the pressure at all costs!
Interpellations
URGENT: we need an ambitious pesticide regulation and as soon as possible!
Context
The EU has a regulatory pesticide package: a Regulation on the evaluation and approval of pesticides and a Directive on the use of these substances which has been under review for 2 years. This Directive published in 2009 was supposed to oblige member states to reduce their dependence on pesticides. Several assessments, including by the European Commission itself, show that member states have not set pesticide reduction targets as required by law. However, the European Commission has not taken legal action against them for failure to implement. At the beginning of 2021, the European Commission is launching a public consultation concerning the revision of this directive (which will ultimately be a Regulation - which means that this text will apply directly in the Member States without transposition). The draft regulation was made public in June 2022. It was immediately attacked by agrochemical lobbies who found it too ambitious, particularly because it sets pesticide reduction targets and prohibits the use of pesticides in sensitive areas. and wishes to strongly encourage alternative systems to intensive agriculture. In December 2022, work was once again slowed down by the vote, denounced by many politicians and NGOs, of a new complementary study putting political negotiations on hold. This decision, widely argued by detractors of the text, causes an unprecedented delay in the legislative file. The additional study was published in June 2023. Despite these uncertainties, the rapporteurs of the Environment Commission and the Agriculture Commission of the European Parliament published their reports. Votes in Commissions take place in October for a vote in plenary at the end of November. Then there will be trilogue discussions with adoption expected in early 2024.
Goals
Ensure that the European Parliament adopts an ambitious regulation with:
- binding pesticide reduction objectives put in place as quickly as possible (with an effective indicator)
- sensitive pesticide-free zones
- an IPM-type agricultural model everywhere and without delay
Where are we in the negotiations around the Pesticides Regulation (SUR ) ?
On Monday October 9, the regulation on the sustainable use of pesticides (SUR) was discussed in the Agriculture Committee (AGRI) in the European Parliament. Générations Futures takes stock of the progress and setbacks on the text.
The SUR regulation is part of the European Green Deal (Green Deal), and intervenes with the aim of remedying shortcomings in the application of the SUD directive establishing a framework for community action to achieve use of pesticides compatible with sustainable development, adopted in 2009. As distinct from a directive, a regulation is directly applicable . What will be adopted by the bodies of the European Union will therefore be directly applicable in French law and binding on the French State!
It took around two and a half hours of discussion for the MEPs of the Agriculture Committee to adopt by 26 votes to 9 the draft opinion of the Spanish rapporteur Clara Aguilera (S&D), as well as the various amendments to the text.
Regulation ON: An objective maintained but delayed and facilitated
This was the flagship measure of this regulation: the 50% reduction in the use and risk of phytosanitary products, as well as the most dangerous pesticides, compared to the average for the years 2015, 2016 and 2017 ( Article 4 ).
If the MEPs of the AGRI committee decided not to touch the symbolic objective of -50%, they preferred to reduce the ambition of this text by postponing the deadline to 2035 and modifying the reference period to 2011 , 2012, 2013, mechanically facilitating the achievement of objectives. Thus, the reduction margin is strongly impacted, at the same time distorting the scope of this objective.
Furthermore, the European People’s Party (EPP – right) continued its offensive to unravel the Green Deal by adopting an amendment removing the ban on the use of pesticides in “ecologically sensitive areas” ( amendment 404 ).
A text unrelated to the CAP, without support in the agroecological transition
The objective of reducing the use and risk of pesticides would accelerate the transition to agroecological production models . The latter represents a cost for farmers, the European Commission’s proposal planned to finance it in part via the common agricultural policy (CAP) in article 43 of the regulation.
However, this article was simply deleted by the majority adoption (31 votes for, 6 against, 2 abstentions) of the amendment proposed by the rapporteur ( amendment 98 ). Clara Aguilera justifies this choice in her draft opinion by declaring that “it is unacceptable for the Commission to rely once again on CAP funds”.
This necessarily raises the question of the means that will be employed in order to achieve the pesticide reduction objectives but also that of coherence between the different European agricultural standards and policies.
A fight that is not yet lost
The SUR Regulation follows an ordinary legislative procedure. Resulting from a proposal from the European Commission, it must be adopted by the Parliament and the Council of the EU and be the subject of a compromise between the two institutions. The Council plans to adopt its position by December 2023.
On the side of Parliament: the AGRI committee only has partial competence over this draft regulation, with the exception of article 43 over which it has exclusive competence.
It is the Environment Commission (ENVI), responsible for the substance, which is now required to decide on the text on October 23 , before a vote in plenary the week of November 20.
We are therefore only at the beginning of the procedure and at this stage: nothing is decided ! Parliamentarians still have the opportunity to reestablish the ambition of the text in the ENVI committee and in plenary.
To go further: 45 NGOs – including Générations Futures – called , in a positioning document released on October 5, all EU member states and members of the European Parliament to support and adopt a strong regulation on sustainable use of pesticides (SUR) without further delay (read the document in French here: Positioning document on SUR , the future regulation on pesticides ).
What we want
For the SUR to deliver on health and environmental protection, we specifically ask you to support the following ten priority demands (see also the Annex for further details):
- Support binding EU and national reduction targets to reduce by at least 50% the use and risk of chemical pesticides by 2030, and to reduce by 100% the use of more hazardous pesticides by 2030. More than 1 million citizens across Europe call for phasing out the use of synthetic pesticides by 80% until 2030, starting with the most hazardous, to become 100% free of synthetic pesticides by 2035. The binding reduction targets should be set also for wholesalers and retailers, to make sure the whole food chain is engaged and contributes to reaching the pesticide reduction goals.
- Support and preserve binding and ambitious implementation of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and crop-specific rules. This requires setting a clear definition of hierarchical IPM steps from general agroecological practices to more crop-specific protection methods, with chemical pesticides being used as a very last resort. IPM should be applied on 100% of utilised agricultural area. Effective and enforceable IPM crop-specific rules have to be in place for at least 90% of the utilised agricultural area. A clear, directly nationally binding framework is a prerequisite for the SUR to lead to efffective changes in agricultural practices, and decrease pesticide dependency
- Replace the Harmonised Risk Indicator 1, which is highly unfit for purpose, and strengthen monitoring and reporting requirements. It is essential that the used indicators allow for a realistic and correct evaluation of the reduction of pesticide use and risk over time. At the same time, regular public reporting of pesticide usage – crop and regional-specific – as well as mandatory monitoring of pesticides and their impact in/on different matrices (soil, water, air, biodiversity, indoor dust, humans) should be included in the SUR, using science-based and robust monitoring indices.
- Ban pesticide use in sensitive areas, to protect human health, the environment and ecosystems. By way of derogation, in case all non-chemical IPM measures have failed and the economic threshold for crop damage is exceeded, low-risk non-synthetic and low-risk biocontrol substances could be allowed in agricultural areas located in sensitive areas (not outside agricultural areas). Within these boundaries, low-input nature-inclusive systems, including organic agriculture, agroecology and agroforestry, can be stimulated in agricultural areas. Sensitive areas should include at least the areas listed in the Annex of this statement.
- Establish effective cultivated or uncultivated buffer zones around sensitive areas to protect citizens and biodiversity, with widths as wide as needed to effectively protect citizens and biodiversity, and of minimally 100m. Cultivated or uncultivated buffers must also be established around all waterways, houses and gardens. Research shows that pesticides are found at very far distances from where they are applied, on children’s playgrounds[1], in indoor dust[2] and nature areas[3]. For example, research3 shows that the number of pesticide residues in insects in nature areas is related to the proportion of agricultural production in a radius of 2,000 m. Measures, in the form of bufferstrips, need to be taken to also effectively protect untreated fields and pastures and organic fields from contamination with (other) pesticides.
- Ensure coherence in the SUR, so that funds under the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) are used to support farmers in reducing pesticide use, and to contribute to the preservation and restoration of ecosystem functioning and the regeneration of rural areas. The public funds of the CAP should be distributed in a fair way, supporting common goods and agricultural practices which reduce pesticides, protect citizens’ health, preserve and restore the environment, while sustainably providing food. Member States can update their national strategic plans every year and make changes in their allocation of funds to align with SUR objectives. SUR obligations need to be reinforced in the specific objectives of the post-2027 CAP and in the conditionality of the CAP Strategic Plans regulation post-2027 (Regulation (EU) 2021/2115). Specifically IPM, crop-specific rules and reduction targets should be part of the conditionality in the post 2027 CAP.
- Ensure that truly independent advisory services are available to support farmers in reducing pesticide use. The pesticide industry should be prohibited from providing any kind of advisory services to farmers.
- Ensure strong provisions on occupational and non-occupational health and safety duties by employers. Introduce sanctions for employers not respecting IPM rules and the reduction targets, and an obligation to provide training on pesticide use to workers during paid working time. Ensure that information is publicly available on pesticide legislation, the potential risks for health and safety linked to the exposure to all used pesticides, and on procedures to report diseases linked to the use of pesticides. Ensure that agricultural workers and citizens can access official documentation reporting the type of pesticides used during their work activity/used in their surroundings to get (occupational) diseases properly recognised in cases of diseases linked to pesticide exposure.
- Implement Extended Producer Responsibility. In addition, introduce a risk-based EU-wide pesticide levy, in a progressive way, and tailored to the toxicity level of pesticides, to finally implement the polluter pays principle. The costs of pesticide impacts are a huge burden to society and should no longer be borne only by people, water companies and farmers using no or minimal amounts of pesticides. Extended Producer Responsibility and a pesticide levy is a first step to internalising the true cost of the use of pesticides, and can contribute to funding for the environmental costs of pesticide use, indemnifying those suffering the collateral damages from the use of pesticides and supporting farmers in the transition to sustainable practices.
- As in the Directive 2009/128/EC and Regulation EC no 1107/2009, include the precautionary principle, set out in Article 191 of the EU Treaty. EU pesticide legislation states that the objective of protecting human and animal health and the environment should take priority over the objective of improving plant production. Therefore, in case of scientific uncertainty regarding risks, the precautionary principle should be applied. This principle should remain key in the SUR, and should also ensure that Member States further restrict or prohibit the use of pesticides in specific circumstances or areas.
We count on you to stand firmly for a more resilient food system and implement the pesticide reduction objectives of the Farm to Fork and Biodiversity Strategies for the benefit of citizens, farmers, biodiversity and agricultural areas across the EU.
[1] Linhart et al. 2019. Pesticide contamination and associated risk factors at public playgrounds near intensively managed apple and wine orchards
[2] The sprint towards a sustainable future – Wageningen University
-
For the SUR to deliver on health and environmental protection, we specifically ask you to support the following ten priority demands (see also the Annex for further details):
- Support binding EU and national reduction targets to reduce by at least 50% the use and risk of chemical pesticides by 2030, and to reduce by 100% the use of more hazardous pesticides by 2030. More than 1 million citizens across Europe call for phasing out the use of synthetic pesticides by 80% until 2030, starting with the most hazardous, to become 100% free of synthetic pesticides by 2035. The binding reduction targets should be set also for wholesalers and retailers, to make sure the whole food chain is engaged and contributes to reaching the pesticide reduction goals.
- Support and preserve binding and ambitious implementation of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and crop-specific rules. This requires setting a clear definition of hierarchical IPM steps from general agroecological practices to more crop-specific protection methods, with chemical pesticides being used as a very last resort. IPM should be applied on 100% of utilised agricultural area. Effective and enforceable IPM crop-specific rules have to be in place for at least 90% of the utilised agricultural area. A clear, directly nationally binding framework is a prerequisite for the SUR to lead to efffective changes in agricultural practices, and decrease pesticide dependency
- Replace the Harmonised Risk Indicator 1, which is highly unfit for purpose, and strengthen monitoring and reporting requirements. It is essential that the used indicators allow for a realistic and correct evaluation of the reduction of pesticide use and risk over time. At the same time, regular public reporting of pesticide usage – crop and regional-specific – as well as mandatory monitoring of pesticides and their impact in/on different matrices (soil, water, air, biodiversity, indoor dust, humans) should be included in the SUR, using science-based and robust monitoring indices.
- Ban pesticide use in sensitive areas, to protect human health, the environment and ecosystems. By way of derogation, in case all non-chemical IPM measures have failed and the economic threshold for crop damage is exceeded, low-risk non-synthetic and low-risk biocontrol substances could be allowed in agricultural areas located in sensitive areas (not outside agricultural areas). Within these boundaries, low-input nature-inclusive systems, including organic agriculture, agroecology and agroforestry, can be stimulated in agricultural areas. Sensitive areas should include at least the areas listed in the Annex of this statement.
- Establish effective cultivated or uncultivated buffer zones around sensitive areas to protect citizens and biodiversity, with widths as wide as needed to effectively protect citizens and biodiversity, and of minimally 100m. Cultivated or uncultivated buffers must also be established around all waterways, houses and gardens. Research shows that pesticides are found at very far distances from where they are applied, on children’s playgrounds[1], in indoor dust[2] and nature areas[3]. For example, research3 shows that the number of pesticide residues in insects in nature areas is related to the proportion of agricultural production in a radius of 2,000 m. Measures, in the form of bufferstrips, need to be taken to also effectively protect untreated fields and pastures and organic fields from contamination with (other) pesticides.
- Ensure coherence in the SUR, so that funds under the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) are used to support farmers in reducing pesticide use, and to contribute to the preservation and restoration of ecosystem functioning and the regeneration of rural areas. The public funds of the CAP should be distributed in a fair way, supporting common goods and agricultural practices which reduce pesticides, protect citizens’ health, preserve and restore the environment, while sustainably providing food. Member States can update their national strategic plans every year and make changes in their allocation of funds to align with SUR objectives. SUR obligations need to be reinforced in the specific objectives of the post-2027 CAP and in the conditionality of the CAP Strategic Plans regulation post-2027 (Regulation (EU) 2021/2115). Specifically IPM, crop-specific rules and reduction targets should be part of the conditionality in the post 2027 CAP.
- Ensure that truly independent advisory services are available to support farmers in reducing pesticide use. The pesticide industry should be prohibited from providing any kind of advisory services to farmers.
- Ensure strong provisions on occupational and non-occupational health and safety duties by employers. Introduce sanctions for employers not respecting IPM rules and the reduction targets, and an obligation to provide training on pesticide use to workers during paid working time. Ensure that information is publicly available on pesticide legislation, the potential risks for health and safety linked to the exposure to all used pesticides, and on procedures to report diseases linked to the use of pesticides. Ensure that agricultural workers and citizens can access official documentation reporting the type of pesticides used during their work activity/used in their surroundings to get (occupational) diseases properly recognised in cases of diseases linked to pesticide exposure.
- Implement Extended Producer Responsibility. In addition, introduce a risk-based EU-wide pesticide levy, in a progressive way, and tailored to the toxicity level of pesticides, to finally implement the polluter pays principle. The costs of pesticide impacts are a huge burden to society and should no longer be borne only by people, water companies and farmers using no or minimal amounts of pesticides. Extended Producer Responsibility and a pesticide levy is a first step to internalising the true cost of the use of pesticides, and can contribute to funding for the environmental costs of pesticide use, indemnifying those suffering the collateral damages from the use of pesticides and supporting farmers in the transition to sustainable practices.
- As in the Directive 2009/128/EC and Regulation EC no 1107/2009, include the precautionary principle, set out in Article 191 of the EU Treaty. EU pesticide legislation states that the objective of protecting human and animal health and the environment should take priority over the objective of improving plant production. Therefore, in case of scientific uncertainty regarding risks, the precautionary principle should be applied. This principle should remain key in the SUR, and should also ensure that Member States further restrict or prohibit the use of pesticides in specific circumstances or areas.
We count on you to stand firmly for a more resilient food system and implement the pesticide reduction objectives of the Farm to Fork and Biodiversity Strategies for the benefit of citizens, farmers, biodiversity and agricultural areas across the EU.
[1] Linhart et al. 2019. Pesticide contamination and associated risk factors at public playgrounds near intensively managed apple and wine orchards
[2] The sprint towards a sustainable future – Wageningen University
Cette interpellation est terminée.
Did you participate in this action? Tell us :
Thank you for taking the time to challenge your representatives
Shake your representatives count on you
Call upon by email
To:
Subject:
Dear MEP,
Vote for an ambitious SUR regulation:
1. Reduce pesticides by 50% by 2030, eliminate the most dangerous ones.
2. Strengthen integrated pest management, limiting the use of pesticides.
3. Replace the current indicator with an application rate per hectare.
4. Ban pesticides in sensitive areas.
5. Establish buffer zones for biodiversity.
6. Use the CAP to reduce pesticides.
7. Offer independent advice to farmers.
8. Ensure safety at work.
9. Tax according to risk.
10. Incorporate the precautionary principle.
These measures will promote a resilient food system and protect health and the environment. Meet citizens' expectations before the 2024 elections. Support an ambitious SUR regulation.
Yours sincerely
Dear MEP,Vote for an ambitious SUR regulation:
1. Reduce pesticides by 50% by 2030, eliminate the most dangerous ones.
2. Strengthen integrated pest management, limiting the use of pesticides.
3. Replace the current indicator with an application rate per hectare.
4. Ban pesticides in sensitive areas.
5. Establish buffer zones for biodiversity.
6. Use the CAP to reduce pesticides.
7. Offer independent advice to farmers.
8. Ensure safety at work.
9. Tax according to risk.
10. Incorporate the precautionary principle.
These measures will promote a resilient food system and protect health and the environment. Meet citizens' expectations before the 2024 elections. Support an ambitious SUR regulation.
Yours sincerely
Vote for an ambitious SUR regulation:
1. Reduce pesticides by 50% by 2030, eliminate the most dangerous ones.
2. Strengthen integrated pest management, limiting the use of pesticides.
3. Replace the current indicator with an application rate per hectare.
4. Ban pesticides in sensitive areas.
5. Establish buffer zones for biodiversity.
6. Use the CAP to reduce pesticides.
7. Offer independent advice to farmers.
8. Ensure safety at work.
9. Tax according to risk.
10. Incorporate the precautionary principle.
These measures will promote a resilient food system and protect health and the environment. Meet citizens' expectations before the 2024 elections. Support an ambitious SUR regulation.
Yours sincerely
*If you do not have an e-mail tool configured, please copy the recipient, subject and text in your messaging tool
*If you do not have an e-mail tool configured, please copy the recipient, subject and text in your messaging tool
Call upon by email
To:
Subject:
Dear MEP
Vote for an ambitious SUR regulation:
1. Reduce pesticides by 50% by 2030, eliminate the most dangerous ones.
2. Strengthen integrated pest management, limiting the use of pesticides.
3. Replace the current indicator with an application rate per hectare.
4. Ban pesticides in sensitive areas.
5. Establish buffer zones for biodiversity.
6. Use the CAP to reduce pesticides.
7. Offer independent advice to farmers.
8. Ensure safety at work.
9. Tax according to risk.
10. Incorporate the precautionary principle.
These measures will promote a resilient food system and protect health and the environment. Meet citizens' expectations before the 2024 elections. Support an ambitious SUR regulation.
Yours sincerely
Dear MEPVote for an ambitious SUR regulation:
1. Reduce pesticides by 50% by 2030, eliminate the most dangerous ones.
2. Strengthen integrated pest management, limiting the use of pesticides.
3. Replace the current indicator with an application rate per hectare.
4. Ban pesticides in sensitive areas.
5. Establish buffer zones for biodiversity.
6. Use the CAP to reduce pesticides.
7. Offer independent advice to farmers.
8. Ensure safety at work.
9. Tax according to risk.
10. Incorporate the precautionary principle.
These measures will promote a resilient food system and protect health and the environment. Meet citizens' expectations before the 2024 elections. Support an ambitious SUR regulation.
Yours sincerely
Vote for an ambitious SUR regulation:
1. Reduce pesticides by 50% by 2030, eliminate the most dangerous ones.
2. Strengthen integrated pest management, limiting the use of pesticides.
3. Replace the current indicator with an application rate per hectare.
4. Ban pesticides in sensitive areas.
5. Establish buffer zones for biodiversity.
6. Use the CAP to reduce pesticides.
7. Offer independent advice to farmers.
8. Ensure safety at work.
9. Tax according to risk.
10. Incorporate the precautionary principle.
These measures will promote a resilient food system and protect health and the environment. Meet citizens' expectations before the 2024 elections. Support an ambitious SUR regulation.
Yours sincerely
*If you do not have an e-mail tool configured, please copy the recipient, subject and text in your messaging tool
*If you do not have an e-mail tool configured, please copy the recipient, subject and text in your messaging tool
Call upon by email
To:
Subject:
Dear MEP,
Vote for an ambitious SUR regulation:
1. Reduce pesticides by 50% by 2030, eliminate the most dangerous ones.
2. Strengthen integrated pest management, limiting the use of pesticides.
3. Replace the current indicator with an application rate per hectare.
4. Ban pesticides in sensitive areas.
5. Establish buffer zones for biodiversity.
6. Use the CAP to reduce pesticides.
7. Offer independent advice to farmers.
8. Ensure safety at work.
9. Tax according to risk.
10. Incorporate the precautionary principle.
These measures will promote a resilient food system and protect health and the environment. Meet citizens' expectations before the 2024 elections. Support an ambitious SUR regulation.
Yours sincerely
Dear MEP,Vote for an ambitious SUR regulation:
1. Reduce pesticides by 50% by 2030, eliminate the most dangerous ones.
2. Strengthen integrated pest management, limiting the use of pesticides.
3. Replace the current indicator with an application rate per hectare.
4. Ban pesticides in sensitive areas.
5. Establish buffer zones for biodiversity.
6. Use the CAP to reduce pesticides.
7. Offer independent advice to farmers.
8. Ensure safety at work.
9. Tax according to risk.
10. Incorporate the precautionary principle.
These measures will promote a resilient food system and protect health and the environment. Meet citizens' expectations before the 2024 elections. Support an ambitious SUR regulation.
Yours sincerely
Vote for an ambitious SUR regulation:
1. Reduce pesticides by 50% by 2030, eliminate the most dangerous ones.
2. Strengthen integrated pest management, limiting the use of pesticides.
3. Replace the current indicator with an application rate per hectare.
4. Ban pesticides in sensitive areas.
5. Establish buffer zones for biodiversity.
6. Use the CAP to reduce pesticides.
7. Offer independent advice to farmers.
8. Ensure safety at work.
9. Tax according to risk.
10. Incorporate the precautionary principle.
These measures will promote a resilient food system and protect health and the environment. Meet citizens' expectations before the 2024 elections. Support an ambitious SUR regulation.
Yours sincerely
*If you do not have an e-mail tool configured, please copy the recipient, subject and text in your messaging tool
*If you do not have an e-mail tool configured, please copy the recipient, subject and text in your messaging tool
Interpeller par twitter
Tweet :.@
we are counting on you to support a strong #pesticide reduction law with:
👉 binding reduction targets at both EU and National Level aligned with the #EUGreenDeal
👉 an improved indicator that actually measures pesticide reduction
https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?url=https%3A%2F%2Fshaketonpolitique.org%2Fen%2Fappeals%2Freglement-pesticides-urgence%2F&text=.@{{twitter}}+we+are+counting+on+you+to+support+a+strong+%23pesticide+reduction+law+with%3A%0D%0A%F0%9F%91%89+binding+reduction+targets+at+both+EU+and+National+Level+aligned+with+the+%23EUGreenDeal%0D%0A%F0%9F%91%89+an+improved+indicator+that+actually+measures+pesticide+reduction{{twitter_mention}}
Interpeller par twitter
Tweet :.@
The HRI1 indicator is bad! Without a good indicator to assess the -50% target for #pesticides, the SUR regulation will be ineffective! #ChangeHRI1 https://youtu.be/-2a2nhHrYyk?si=Tfl6t0iPIFRRGvh4
https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?url=https%3A%2F%2Fshaketonpolitique.org%2Fen%2Fappeals%2Freglement-pesticides-urgence%2F&text=.@{{twitter}}+The+HRI1+indicator+is+bad%21+Without+a+good+indicator+to+assess+the+-50%25+target+for+%23pesticides%2C+the+SUR+regulation+will+be+ineffective%21+%23ChangeHRI1+https%3A%2F%2Fyoutu.be%2F-2a2nhHrYyk%3Fsi%3DTfl6t0iPIFRRGvh4{{twitter_mention}}
Interpeller par twitter
Tweet :.@
https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?url=https%3A%2F%2Fshaketonpolitique.org%2Fen%2Fappeals%2Freglement-pesticides-urgence%2F&text=.@{{twitter}}+{{twitter_mention}}