Mediaboss Marketing

The European Commission has given the State two months to act on what it said was a failure to transpose EU consumer rights protections and disability access rules into national law or face being taken to the European Court of Justice.

In a statement, the EU executive said it had decided to continue two infringement procedures against Ireland and several other member states for failing to comply with their obligations under EU law in the field of consumer protection.

The Government said after the statement was issued however that it had already transposed the consumer rights directive in question and had informally told the commission about this.

Ireland and the other EU states now have two months to address the shortcomings identified by the Commission. In the absence of a satisfactory response, the Commission may decide to refer them to the Court of Justice of the European Union, the commission had said.

The commission sent a formal letter on the matter to Ireland, as well as Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Luxembourg and Poland.

The 2020 directive concerned requires EU countries to allow designated consumer organisations and public bodies to bring traders to court on behalf of consumers if they use illegal practices.

If consumers have been harmed by an illegal commercial practice, they can seek compensation, replacement, or repair.

A spokesman for the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment said on Friday that the Bill transposing the rules had been signed into law by President Higgins on July 11th.

As such, Ireland has met its obligations and transposed the directive. The European Commission was notified of this development, informally, on Wednesday, 12th July, he said. The department will formally notify the commission in the coming days and expects that the infringement proceeding against Ireland will then be closed.

At issue in the second instance of infringement procedures is the European Accessibility Act of 2019, which set out that key products and services such as phones, computers, ebooks, banking services, and electronic communications must be accessible to people with disabilities.

Businesses and services must comply with a set of EU accessibility standards by 2025 under the law.

The commission said in a statement that Ireland had yet to transpose the rules into national law and that it had failed to notify the executive on how this would be done.

It sent formal letters of notice to Ireland as well as Cyprus, Bulgaria, the Netherlands and Poland over the issue, giving the countries two months to respond and take the necessary measures or else face being taken to the European Court of Justice.

A Government response on the second directive was sought.

Read this article:
European Commission gives Ireland deadline to act over consumer ... - The Irish Times

A leaked document has revealed that the European Commission is set to recommend a radical rethink of how the EU regulates some genetically engineered crops. This would mean light or no regulation for gene-edited crops with DNA changes that could have occurred in nature.

The commission had previously concluded in 2021 that current EU legislation for new genomic techniques (NGTs) is not fit for purpose. Such techniques could reduce the use of pesticides on crops, allow crops to be better adapted for warmer climates or generate plants more resistant to pests and diseases.

EU regulations currently demand that plants with changes introduced by Crispr gene editing go through an onerous and expensive approval process. This places them on a par with genetically modified organisms (GMOs), which can contain genes introduced from entirely different organisms transgenes.

This followed a ruling by the European Court of Justice in July 2018 that gene edited crops are subject to the same 2001 regulations as GMOs. The decision set the EU apart globally and was criticised by many plant scientists for hamstringing crop biotech. Many environmental organisations support the 2018 position, however.

In a leaked document, the commission recommends substantial changes in regulating plants obtained by targeted mutagenesiswhen the changes could be achieved through conventional breeding.

Such plants would be treated similarly to conventional plants and would not require authorisation, risk assessment, traceability and labelling as GMOs, according to the document. A transparency register would be set up for these plants.

The draft also recommends that some leeway be given to gene-edited plants that could contribute to more sustainable agriculture, with labels potentially introduced to inform consumers.

The draft document emphasised that NGTs do not introduce genetic material from a non-crossable species, which is what happens with GMOs, and referenced the conclusion of the European Food Safety Authority that there are no new hazards linked to targeted mutagenesis compared with conventional breeding.

Plant scientist Agnes Ricroch at the University of Paris-Saclay and French Academy of Agriculture in France, welcomed the proposal, pointing to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and its impact on food supply in Europe, as well as the need to adapt crops for new climate conditions. We need to increase yields for wheat, corn, rapeseed, sunflower, she says. NGTs can accelerate the process of breeding, though it will still take time.

She notes that climate change is bringing new pests and diseases into Europe and farmers will need new crop varieties. She adds that the proposals would encourage plant scientists to innovate and perhaps launch biotech start-up companies.

This is a great step by the European Union, says Jon Entine, director of the Genetic Literacy Project, which published the leaked draft. This document suggests that were going to put the issue back in the hands of farmers and scientist. He adds that this doesnt mean that ideology and politics wont have a role in shaping regulations, but for the first time it will mean that Europe will not be a scientific laggard on these issues.

Many NGOs have expressed opposition to the proposals in the draft document, nonetheless. The assumption the commission makes that new GMOs would lead to more sustainability are based on industrys claims, instead of real evidence, said Nina Holland, a researcher at Corporate Europe Observatory, in a media release. Since NGT seeds will be patented, this will erode farmers rights, and it will lead to a further monopolisation of the already highly concentrated seed market.

Plant scientist Sjef Smeekens at Utrech University, the Netherlands, warns the EU will import gene-edited foodstuffs from elsewhere and no one will know, since countries such as the US, Japan and Canada allow them without registration. If we in the EU opt out of this system, then it will have severe consequences for our breeding industry and academic research in plant science, he adds.

The proposal is expected to be published on 5 July. It must go before the European parliament and the Council of Ministers that represents each of the 27 EU member states. This legal position if accepted must operate in all EU countries. If a country like France or Germany really objects, then this is dead, says Smeekens.

The UK introduced a new law earlier this year to permit some gene editing of crops or livestock.

View original post here:
European Commission set to propose an overhaul of rules for gene ... - Chemistry World

The European Union is calling for international talks on a potential worldwide framework on how to treat and regulate deliberately atmosphere-altering tech, aka geoengineering.

What Is Carbon Capture? With Gizmodos Molly Taft | Techmodo

In a statement released today, the European Commission argued that the risks and long-term impacts of geoengineering arent well underst ood and that necessary regulations havent been developed. [The tech] could also increase power imbalances between nations, spark conflicts and raises a myriad of ethical, legal, governance and political issues, the commission wrote .

Nobody should be conducting experiments alone with our shared planet, Frans Timmermans, the European Union climate policy chief, said according to Reuters. This should be discussed in the right forum, at the highest international level.

Theres a reason why global leaders are worried about environment-altering projects going unchecked. Geoengineering describes new technologies and strategies that are used to help lower global temperatures. They include carbon capture projects, but a lot of that tech is relatively new and isnt always effective (and sometimes backed by big oil). Some geoengineering proposals are kind of alarming and feel like something out of a sci-fi horror film. This is especially true for solar radiation modification ideas, projects that seek to block the suns rays from reaching the planet.

Earlier this year, a group of researchers at Harvard and the University of Utah proposed a solution to shoot millions of tons of moon dust into Earths orbit to partially block out the Suns rays every year. An explosion on the moon that has catastrophic implications for the globe is actually the plot of a book series titled Life As We Knew It by Susan Beth Pfeffer. Spoilereverything went to hell and people died.

Some suggestions have been pretty cool concepts in theory. Last year, a team of researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology announced an idea that included engineering a huge raft of bubbles that would be sent into outer space. The raft would sit between the Earth and the Sun and would be big enough to deflect sunlight away from the planet to slow down global warming. But sending rockets into space also creates emissions that will contribute to the overall problem.

Geoengineering might be our final and only option. Yet, most geoengineering proposals are earth-bound, which poses tremendous risks to our living ecosystem, an MIT web page explained. Which, hey, its cool in theory. But when would we have the technology (and the funding) to send a bubble raft into space?

And some forms of geoengineering have already been utilized in the U.S. Colorados Weather Modification Program has used cloud seeding to boost snowfall. This is when silver iodide particles are released into clouds to promote the generation of ice particles, which then turn into falling snow. Earlier this year, the Southern Nevada Water Authority accepted a more than $2 million grant to support more cloud seeding in Western states, the Associated Press reported. But this form of geoengineering requires specific conditionsit has to already snow for this to work, and there needs to be enough humidity in the atmosphere.

None of this is to say that the creativity used in geoengineering concepts isnt cool. But why not simply hold fossil fuel companies accountable for achieving record profits at the expense of the rest of us? And the EU isnt the first government to push for stricter regulations. This January, Mexicos government moved to ban solar geoengineering projects in the country after the startup Make Sunsets claimed that it released weather balloons filled with sulfur dioxide particles in the Mexican state of Baja California Sur. The sulfur dioxide particles are reflective and were supposed to block sunlight. However these particles could contribute to acid rain and can irritate peoples lungs, The Verge reported. A few balloons may not cause those problems, but the company conducted this experiment without any sort of approval from Mexican authorities.

Want more climate and environment stories? Check out Earthers guides to decarbonizing your home, divesting from fossil fuels, packing a disaster go bag, and overcoming climate dread. And dont miss our coverage of the latest IPCC climate report, the future of carbon dioxide removal, and the invasive bugs you should squash on sight.

Go here to see the original:
The European Union Is Getting Nervous About Atmosphere-Altering ... - Gizmodo

The European Election Observation Mission (EU EOM) to Nigeria has today published its final report on the federal and state elections of 25 February and 18 March. The Chief Observer, Barry Andrews, Member of the European Parliament, stated: In the lead up to the 2023 general elections Nigerian citizens demonstrated a clear commitment to the democratic process. That said, the election exposed enduring systemic weaknesses and therefore signal a need for further legal and operational reforms to enhance transparency, inclusiveness, and accountability.

Following a three-month-long observation across Nigeria, and in accordance with its usual practice, the EU EOM is now pleased to present its findings and recommendations. Shortcomings in law and electoral administration hindered the conduct of well-run and inclusive elections and damaged trust in INEC. With the aim of contributing to the improvement of future elections, the EU EOM is offering 23 recommendations for consideration by the Nigerian authorities.

We are particularly concerned about the need for reform in six areas which we have identified as priority recommendations, and we believe, if implemented, could contribute to improvements for the conduct of elections. said Barry Andrews.

The six priority recommendations point to the need to (1) remove ambiguities in the law, (2) establish a publicly accountable selection process for INEC members, (3) ensure real-time publication of and access to election results, (4) provide greater protection for media practitioners, address (5) discrimination against women in political life, and (6) impunity regarding electoral offenses.

Chief Observer, Barry Andrews, noted: Importantly, there is a need for political will to achieve improved democratic practices in Nigeria. Inclusive dialogue between all stakeholders on electoral reform remains crucial. The European Union stands ready to support Nigerian stakeholders in the implementation of these recommendations.

At the invitation of the Independent Electoral Commission of Nigeria, the EU EOM carried out its work between 11 January and 11 April. A delegation of the European Parliament joined the EU EOM for the observation of the Presidential and National Assembly elections. The mission accredited a total of 110 observers from 25 EU Member States, as well as Norway, Switzerland, and Canada.

Read the original here:
The European Union Election Observation Mission presented its ... - EEAS

Published on June 29, 2023

After months of effort, negotiations, and expressions of concern about mesothelioma and other deadly diseases, members of the European Parliament have prevailed on the European Union (EU) to overhaul its asbestos policies. The new exposure limits will now match that of the Netherlands, which currently has the lowest existing limit in the EU.

In response to growing knowledge about asbestos role in the development of mesothelioma, the European Union banned the use of the toxic mineral in 2005, and some countries took action far earlier than that. But the prohibition on current and future use did not address the existence of asbestos that was already in place in the roofs, ceilings, electrical systems, and insulation of buildings constructed before the ban. With a robust renovation initiative planned for the immediate future, advocates for workplace health knew that it was time to take action.

The new rules are expected to significantly lower the incidence of mesothelioma in the future, as they change the occupational exposure limit from 0.1 to 0.01 fibers per cm3, a tenfold shift downward. The numbers will be decreased again after a maximum time period of six years, dropping to 0.002 fibers per cm3, which is the current maximum level in the Netherlands.

Though workers representatives acknowledge that the new regulations will lower mesothelioma rates in the future, they are still concerned about workers who are currently exposed, and urge people to begin acting on the new exposure limits now. Speaking to these worries, Claes-Mikael Stahl, Deputy General Secretary of the European Trade Union Confederation said, Todays agreement is an important step forward in ending the scandal of workplace cancer. But the long implementation period means that workers wont benefit from the safer limit until after much of the work as part of the renovation wave has been completed.

He went on to say, That is why it is imperative that member states do not wait until the end of the implementation period and put the lower limit into effect as soon as possible.

While European workers enjoy greater protections against in place asbestos, workers in the United States continue to face the risk of malignant mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases. For information on facing these diseases, contact the Patient Advocates at Mesothelioma.net today at 1-800-692-8608.

Learn more about and contact Terri

Continue reading here:
European Union Takes on Mesothelioma with New Asbestos Rules - Mesothelioma.net Blog