On 15 July, the farm lobby’s office in Brussels will host a joint lobbying meeting organised by the European agricultural association Copa‑Cogeda and the pesticide trade body Croplife EU. Several Members of the European Parliament are scheduled to attend.

Lobbying push

The meeting is intended to promote changes to the European Commission’s Food and Feed Omnibus proposal. The key amendment under discussion would eliminate the periodic renewal assessments that currently require pesticides to be re‑evaluated when new scientific data emerge. Those renewal assessments are presently the only formal mechanism that can lead to the withdrawal of a pesticide after its initial authorisation.

Proponents of the amendment argue that the existing assessment system creates regulatory burdens and harms the competitiveness of European agriculture. They contend that removing the renewal checks would streamline the authorisation process.

Health and environmental concerns

Opponents warn that scrapping renewal checks would remove a vital tool for acting on new health or environmental evidence. Recent research links pesticide exposure to higher rates of Parkinson’s disease, cancer and neurotoxicity. A Dutch neurologist has highlighted epidemiological studies that connect pesticide exposure with a higher incidence of Parkinson’s disease.

The EU‑funded SPRINT project reported an average of 80 pesticide compounds in household dust from conventional farms, a level higher than that found in dust from organic farms. Germany, France and Italy have officially recognised Parkinson’s disease as an occupational illness for farm workers who handle pesticides.

Substances that have been banned can remain in soil and water for many years, potentially causing health effects long after their use has ceased. Commission officials have indicated that the proposed changes would lower protection levels for consumers and agricultural workers.

Political dynamics

Herbert Dorfmann, a Member of the European Parliament from the European People’s Party and former lobbyist, is steering the Omnibus proposal through the European Parliament. Italian MEP Michele Picaro, affiliated with the far‑right Fratelli group, is working with Dorfmann on amendments that would further reduce health safeguards. The deadline for MEPs to submit amendments to the proposal falls within the same week as the lobbying meeting.

A 2021 investigation by Corporate Europe Observatory found that Copa‑Cogeda and Croplife EU previously coordinated a joint campaign against the EU’s Farm to Fork strategy, using impact studies from Wageningen University that later apologised for their involvement.

Potential impact

Croplife EU represents major pesticide manufacturers, including Bayer and Syngenta. The organisation has also lobbied for the EU‑Mercosur free‑trade agreement, which was signed in December despite opposition from agricultural unions. Croplife and its member companies have sought to soften EU restrictions on imports containing substances banned in the EU, arguing that strict rules would distort trade.

If the Omnibus reforms are adopted, hazardous chemicals could remain on the market longer, increasing exposure risk for farmworkers, their families and nearby residents. Any future health costs would mainly be borne by individuals and national health systems rather than the chemical producers.

Trade unions warn that weakening pesticide regulations would exacerbate inequalities, particularly for small growers who lack protective equipment or alternative pest‑management options. Large agribusinesses that rely on chemical inputs could gain a competitive advantage, potentially consolidating market power and reducing the bargaining position of independent farmers.

Critics say Copa‑Cogeda should advocate for stronger health protections, such as EU‑wide recognition of Parkinson’s as an occupational disease and compensation schemes for affected workers. They also call for a precautionary pesticide framework that prioritises integrated pest management and reduces reliance on synthetic chemicals.

Environmental NGOs, national farmer unions and other stakeholders are closely monitoring the upcoming parliamentary vote on the proposal.