The Advisory Committee on Pesticides provides independent advice to Ministers on matters relating to the regulation and use of pesticides, including applications for approval of new products and reviews of existing approvals. It usually meets in closed session (because of intellectual property and commercial secrecy considerations) approximately six times a year in York.
This special meeting was for members to discuss and finalise their official response to the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) report on Crop Spraying and the Health of Residents and Bystanders.
Those present:
Chairman: Prof D Coggon
Members: Prof N Bateman, Dr J Cherrie, Dr R Clutterbuck, Prof D Colman, Dr C Elcombe, Dr I Grieve,
Prof G Hawksworth, Prof C V Howard, Ms D McCrea, Dr D Osborn, Dr R Waring
Apologies: Mr J Clarke, Prof D Macdonald, Ms R Howell, Dr A Leake, Prof L Maltby,
Dr P McElhatton, Dr M McPherson, Professor R Smith, Dr V K Tohani
Observer: Prof J Ayres
At the special meeting on 8th December 2005, the Committee discussed the following issues:
1 The ACP response to the RCEP report on Crop Spraying and the Health of Residents and Bystanders
1.1 The Chairman welcomed members to this special meeting, which had been convened to take forward the work on drafting the ACP response to the RCEP report. He thanked members for their contributions so far, and said he considered that the discussion at the November ACP meeting had been very helpful.
1.2 Members who had been unable to attend the November meeting provided their overviews on the RCEP report and draft ACP response.
1.3 The Chairman thanked members for their thoughts, and then turned to a paper that had been prepared for the ACP by Pesticides Safety Directorate (PSD).
1.4 Members discussed this paper, which drew together data (some new) on potential exposures at various distances from a spray boom.
1.5 Members then considered the most recent draft of the main body of the response, and discussed how most effectively to communicate their views on the levels of scientific uncertainty in risk assessment for residents and other bystanders.
1.6 Several amendments were agreed.
1.7 Members next discussed the draft summary and annexes of the response. Various amendments were agreed.
1.8 The Chairman outlined a suggested plan for the submission and publication of the response, which was agreed. He thanked members for their helpful and constructive input at the meeting.
Prof David Coggon
January 2006
