Source · Select Committees · Science, Innovation and Technology Committee
Recommendation 33
33
Acknowledged
Paragraph: 191
Pesticide regulatory system hinders innovation in sustainable agricultural alternatives due to high costs.
Conclusion
While a contentious debate exists between nature conservation groups and agriculturalists regarding the use of conventional pesticides, both sides acknowledge the importance of developing new solutions, emphasising the need for increased investment in practical research and development. The regulatory system’s failure to distinguish between conventional chemicals and alternative plant protection products such as biopesticides, coupled with high costs and lengthy approval processes, pose a barrier to innovation. Streamlining this process is essential for advancing environmentally sustainable alternatives in agricultural practices.
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges the conclusion, restating its priority for pesticide safety and existing science-based regulatory processes, including ongoing monitoring. It highlights advances in targeted application technologies but does not commit to streamlining the regulatory system or distinguishing between conventional and alternative plant protection products to reduce barriers to innovation.
Paragraph Reference:
191
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
Defra acknowledges this recommendation. The Government’s first priority with regard to pesticides is to ensure that they will not harm people or pose unacceptable risks to the environment. Now that we have left the EU, and operate an independent GB pesticides regime, we will continue to base decisions on the use of pesticides on careful scientific assessment of the risks. This provides a high level of protection for people and the environment, while improving agricultural production. A pesticide may only be placed on the market in Great Britain if the product has been authorised by our expert regulator, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), following a thorough scientific risk assessment that concludes all safety standards are met. Pesticides that pose unacceptable risks are not authorised. All authorised plant protection products have statutory conditions of use that must be followed, and our strict, science-based regulation is supplemented with policies to encourage safe and minimal use. We will continue to support the monitoring of pesticides in both the terrestrial and aquatic environments, for example through funding and active engagement with the H4 indicator programme. The H4 indicator is one of a suite of indicators within the Outcome Indicator Framework (OIF) of the EIP and is specifically focused on understanding and tracking the exposure and adverse effects of chemicals on wildlife in the environment. As well as lower risk/more targeted pesticides, other innovative approaches can reduce risks both to operators and to non-target species. Recent years have seen advances in technology that allows the more precise and targeted application of pesticides. This includes low-drift nozzles, spot sprayers and weed wipers supported by GPS, cameras and computer recognition. In certain situations, drones could also help apply pesticides safely in hard-to-reach areas. As we develop our policies and regulation, we will ensure that they support this type of innovation.