no regulatory cooperation activities on chemicals and pesticides in the Regulatory Cooperation Forum (RCF) under CETA

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

ClientEarth argues that Canada's chemical and pesticide regulations are significantly less restrictive than those of the EU, citing the continued use of 46 active agents banned elsewhere and more lenient maximum residual limits for pesticides in food. The organization warns that the Regulatory Cooperation Forum (RCF) under CETA could allow Canadian business interests to pressure the EU to weaken its environmental protections, specifically regarding endocrine disruptors and the precautionary principle. ClientEarth contends that regulatory cooperation on environmental issues should occur in international environmental fora rather than trade agreements focused on trade facilitation.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • ClientEarth asserts that Canada's environmental policies and laws regarding air and water quality, pesticides, harmful substances, climate change, and biodiversity lag behind those of the European Union, the United States, and Australia.
  • Specific regulatory discrepancies are noted: Canada permits 46 active agents in pesticides that are banned in other countries, maintains less restrictive maximum residual limits for pesticides in food (sometimes below Codex Alimentarius standards), and considers phthalates safe for most uses while the EU restricts them as dangerous.
  • ClientEarth argues that trade agreements aimed at trade facilitation are inappropriate venues for discussing public interest issues related to chemical exposure, suggesting instead that such cooperation happen in international environmental fora.

Cite the original document

APA
ClientEarth (2018). no regulatory cooperation activities on chemicals and pesticides in the Regulatory Cooperation Forum (RCF) under CETA. https://www.clientearth.org/media/3zfje54i/letter-to-european-commission-on-regulatory-cooperation-in-ceta-on-chemicals-and-pesticides-ce-en.pdf
Chicago
ClientEarth. no regulatory cooperation activities on chemicals and pesticides in the Regulatory Cooperation Forum (RCF) under CETA. 2018. https://www.clientearth.org/media/3zfje54i/letter-to-european-commission-on-regulatory-cooperation-in-ceta-on-chemicals-and-pesticides-ce-en.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite press release |author=ClientEarth |title=no regulatory cooperation activities on chemicals and pesticides in the Regulatory Cooperation Forum (RCF) under CETA |date=16 February 2018 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/3zfje54i/letter-to-european-commission-on-regulatory-cooperation-in-ceta-on-chemicals-and-pesticides-ce-en.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@misc{clientearth2018regulatory, author = {{ClientEarth}}, title = {{no regulatory cooperation activities on chemicals and pesticides in the Regulatory Cooperation Forum (RCF) under CETA}}, publisher = {ClientEarth}, year = {2018}, month = feb, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/3zfje54i/letter-to-european-commission-on-regulatory-cooperation-in-ceta-on-chemicals-and-pesticides-ce-en.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated