Thread by @josiecoh

1/ - Great to see lots of outrage about @DefraGovUK's decision to allow sugar beet farmers to use #neonics. Here is a thread with some of detail and nuance that the headlines won't cover.... @PAN_UK

2/ - UK Government’s decision to support the neonics ban was based on advice in Oct 2017 from its own advisory body on pesticides - the Expert Committee on Pesticides (ECP) - see the ECP's conclusions here on page 4 - bit.ly/3sgcuWw

3/ - In Aug 2018, the ECP advised the Gov't to reject a neonics derogation saying "..on the basis of the evidence presented, particularly in relation to the potential degree of environmental risk, the case has not yet been made to grant an emergency authorisation
for this use."

4/ Body of evidence outlining harms caused by neonics has grown since 2018 so why has @DefraGovUK decided to grant the derogation this time? If the ECP has new evidence showing that neonics are less harmful than we thought then why haven't they published it?

5/ The AHDB which focusses on increasing productivity of UK farming stated in December 2020 that "...maintaining access to withdrawn active substances through application for emergency authorisation is not a sustainable practice for the industry."bit.ly/2Llf6BX

6/ The text accompanying Friday's decision to allow neonics to be used contains some bizarre details e.g. "...risks could be posed to bees from flowering weeds in and around the crop and proposed to address this with the use of industry-recommended herbicide programme..."

7/ So to protect bees, farmers are encouraged to use herbicides in order to get rid of habitat relied on by bees and other pollinators! In addition to destroying habitat this advice also ignores mounting evidence that many herbicides harm bees directly.

8/ The text also states that "Risks to birds from consuming treated seeds were not demonstrated to be acceptable, but the consumption of pelleted seeds is considered an unlikely route of exposure." This contradicts recent research bit.ly/35v0bMg

9/ Also says "Conditions are attached to the emergency authorisation to ensure that...use of the product will be limited and controlled..." But how will that be possible? Once a neonic-coated seed is planted in the ground then its impossible to control where the chemical ends up.

10/ Friday's authorisation is just for 2021 but "The plan anticipates that applications for emergency authorisations for neonicotinoid seed treatments may be needed for three years (2021 to 2023)." bit.ly/2XvCXBy

11/ The neonic product that has been authorised is made by pesticide giant @Syngenta which, alongside their lobbying for neonics, also runs programmes in UK schools..."highlighting the importance of pollinating insects to our food security" bit.ly/3nASLNE

12/ I really sympathise with farmers struggling to produce in tough circumstances. But @DefraGovUK should have spent the last few years (since the neonic ban was announced) supporting the sector to find non-chemical alternatives and adopt nature-based integrated pest management.

13/ While the neonic decision undermines UK Gov't promises of better environmental protection post-Brexit, it could have happened even if the UK was in the EU. In fact, France and a few other EU countries have also granted emergency derogations for neonics in the past 6 months.

14/ But we must do better. If @DefraGovUK is serious about achieving its environmental aspirations on bees, but also on clean water and healthy soil, then it must reverse this decision before the treated seeds are planted and work with farmers to find non-chemical alternatives.