Stickers for Disney toxics campaign
Does your party support an amendment to the REACH legislation that ensures the "substitution principle" is a legal requirement?
Conservative Party
No response received.
Green Party of England and Wales
The Green Party wholeheartedly supports Greenpeace's chemicals campaign.
Green Party policies seek to further the protection of human health and well-being while respecting other species and ecosystems. Protecting people, other species and the environment are key priorities for us, and our economic policies are carefully designed to tackle the problems caused by inappropriate, unhealthy or unsustainable technology or development.
Where chemical testing is concerned, our first priority is the precautionary principle and our second is to ensure thorough and effective safety-testing. But we want all chemical testing to be carried out through a non-animal test strategy, so that chemicals can be properly safety-tested without perpetuating the suffering of animals in the vivisection industry.
Green Party of Scotland
Yes, we would certainly support such an amendment. Indeed Eleanor Scott MSP has called for the implementation of the 'substitution principle' in the Scottish Parliament. Meanwhile Green MEPs have been fighting hard to resist industry lobbying, and to ensure that public protection is put before private profit. More info on the Scottish Green Party position on REACH and toxic chemicals is available here:
www.scottishgreens.org.uk
www.scottish.parliament.uk
Labour Party
Labour shares Greenpeace's concern on chemicals that are carcinogenic, very persistent and very bioaccumulative and endocrine-disrupting. We support their inclusion in the authorisation process for the new EU Chemicals Strategy - REACH - so that they can be phased out in favour of safer alternatives.
Specifically, chemicals will have to be phased out unless industry can demonstrate that, for a specific use, the chemical can be used safely. In our view, the authorisation process must be designed so that it ensures proper control of such substances and leads to their eventual replacement by suitable substances or technologies.
However there are practical difficulties in making this substitution an absolute legal requirement under REACH. We are currently considering the provisions in the draft legislation relating to substitution to see whether they are likely to achieve the desired effect of acting as a sufficiently strong incentive - along with other incentives such as market pressure - for industry to innovate and develop new and safer substitutes.
Liberal Democrats
Yes, the Liberal Democrats would support such a principle in the case of chemicals of high concern where there is a clear, viable alternative.
We also want to minimise the use of animal tests.
