WORLD
NEWS> WORLD SUMMIT AGREES ON TOXIC BAN BY 2020
WORLD
SUMMIT AGREES ON TOXIC BAN BY 2020 - JOHANNESBURG AUGUST 2002
From
Anthony Browne, Environment Editor in Johannesburg
THE worlds first international agreement to ban the use
and production of toxic chemicals has been reached at the Earth
Summit in Johannesburg. All countries will have to ban chemicals
that are hazardous to human health or the environment by 2020.
It is the most significant step forward at the troubled summit
and the surprise deal was struck only after a U-turn by the United
States. It is a significant victory for the European Union delegation,
which had expected the US to hold out until heads of state arrived
next week.
The US had
been strongly opposing any targets and was worried about the effect
of the agreement on its industry.
The agreement
means that 190 countries will have to clamp down on dangerous
chemicals in consumer products, as well as on factories that release
toxic chemicals into the environment. The main beneficiaries will
be the billions of people in the developing world who at present
have little legal protection.
Western companies
that sell toxic chemicals to developing countries could be severely
affected as could companies such as Shell and Mitsubishi that
have factories there with poor pollution records.
Chemicals
that face global bans include lindane, parathion, pirimiphos and
lead additives for petrol. These are banned in the EU, but European
manufacturers make them here and then sell them to Africa and
Asia.
An official
of the British delegation at the summit said: We are very
pleased that this target has been agreed. It is a target that
all UN countries will be striving to achieve by 2020. It demonstrates
the real value of this summit.
The US had
said that it opposed all targets and EU governments feared that
that may render the final agreement worthless. This week, however,
the US backed down on targets to protect fish stocks and marine
environments. It is thought that it has made concessions on chemicals
and fish for tactical reasons, making it easier to hold out on
targets for providing sanitation in the Third World and increasing
the use of renewable energy.
Mike Childs,
of Friends of the Earth, said: The implications are huge.
It is a vote of confidence in EU proposals and a huge defeat for
the chemicals industry.
Under the
final wording, the countries commit themselves to aim to achieve
by 2020 that chemicals are used and produced in ways that lead
to the minimisation of significant adverse effects on human health
and the environment.
John Prescott,
the Deputy Prime Minister, says in an interview today that failure
at the summit would lead to the unravelling of the international
negotiating system created over the past 50 years.
He told The
Independent: This is a very difficult conference where a
lot of thing are working against agreement. But he said
that there was a better mood than he had expected and that the
Americans were still involved in constructive talks.
Meanwhile,
a delegation of senior American politicians accused President
Bush of undermining the war on terrorism by blocking plans to
alleviate world poverty and tackle environmental problems.
The delegation,
all Democrats, said that vetoing efforts to tackle issues that
were life and death to hundreds of millions of people
would have far-reaching consequences. You cant opt
for multilateral co-operation on only the things you have an interest
in, George Miller, a California congressman, said. The
President is pressuring governments to fall in line on the war
on terrorism, but unless you see us co-operating on issues that
are an immediate life-or-death issue in those countries, its
a horrible mistake.
SOURCE:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-398598,00.html
TOP