Express & Star

UK exported thousands of tonnes of banned pesticides in 2023, probe reveals

The UK shipped enough of a bee-killing insecticide overseas to spray an area bigger than England, a Greenpeace investigation found.

By contributor By Rebecca Speare-Cole, PA sustainability reporter
Published
Last updated
Bees on a sunflower head
An investigation has found banned bee-killing pesticides are being exported from the UK (Paul Marriott/PA)

The UK exported thousands of tonnes of pesticides last year that have been banned domestically due to their harmful impacts, an investigation has found.

Greenpeace’s investigation unit Unearthed and Swiss campaign group Public Eye analysed documents that companies submitted to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) when exporting banned chemicals.

The documents – obtained under freedom of information laws – showed that the UK shipped 8,500 tonnes of toxic pesticides overseas in 2023, including enough of a banned bee-killing insecticide to spray an area bigger than England.

Also among the exports were thousands of tonnes of diquat – a weedkiller banned in the UK in 2018 because of the high risk it poses to people living near fields.

The investigation found that almost all (98%) of the harmful pesticides were shipped by the UK subsidiary of agrochemical giant, Syngenta, which continues to make these products at its manufacturing plant in Huddersfield.

Under UK laws, a pesticide banned domestically can still be produced and exported, meaning companies like Syngenta are free to continue manufacturing the chemicals in the UK to be sold overseas.

Campaigners say the UK has not taken any steps to restrict cross-border trade of these products, in contrast to France and Belgium which have introduced export bans, and the European Commission which has committed to ending the practice of manufacturing banned chemicals for export.

Doug Parr, Greenpeace UK’s chief scientist, called on the Government to follow European countries to stop the production and export of all pesticides banned for use on Britain’s farms and fields.

“Talk about double standards,” he said.

“The UK has, quite rightly, banned the use of these toxic pesticides due to the dangers they pose to both human health and wildlife.

“Why then do we think it’s OK to give pesticides giants, like Syngenta, carte blanche to dump this poison on countries with weaker regulations, knowing full well the harm it’s causing?

“Farmers and nature are being exploited for corporate benefits.”

Diquat was the UK’s most exported banned pesticide last year, according to the analysis, which found that Syngenta’s UK shipments of the pesticide made up 60% (5,123 tonnes) of the total exports in 2023.

More than half of this went to Brazil, where farmers are using the pesticide to replace a similar weed killer paraquat, which has been linked to poisoning deaths around the world and was recently banned in the country.

UK paraquat exports have dropped to a quarter of their previous levels following a wave of national bans and Syngenta pulling out of the paraquat market in some countries, the campaigners said.

They found that recent sales of diquat as a replacement have rocketed in Brazil, increasing from around 1,400 to 24,000 tonnes – more than 1,600% – between 2019 and 2022.

The Brazilian state of Parana, which is the country’s biggest diquat user, has seen a sharp rise in poisonings from the pesticide, according to their findings.

The investigation also revealed that Syngenta is exporting pesticides from the UK containing hundreds of tonnes of the neonicotinoid insecticide, thiamethoxam.

Neonicotinoids destroy bees’ nervous systems and are banned in Europe and the UK.

However the former Conservative government has granted emergency authorisation for its use every year in the UK since 2021.

Syngenta was found to have exported nearly 400 tonnes of thiamethoxam from the UK to countries including Cote d’Ivoire, Ukraine and Morocco last year.

A Syngenta spokesperson said the company does not manufacture the active ingredients thiamethoxam or chlorothalonil in the UK and “firmly disagrees with Unearthed’s characterisation” of the company.

He went on: “Agricultural needs differ globally, and the use of agrochemical products is based on assessment by national governments of the risks and the benefits for use in their own country. On this basis, in some instances, Syngenta’s UK manufacturing facilities provide products no longer available or needed in a UK domestic context but deemed required for agronomic and agricultural reasons by farmers and regulators in the importing country.

“In exporting products from the UK, Syngenta respects the sovereignty and direction of the importing country, meets all the international regulatory requirements including Prior Informed Consent and provides stewardship and detailed information in country to promote the safe application by end users.”

“Wherever we operate, we do this in full compliance with local laws and regulations,” they added.

The new Labour Government is reportedly thinking of allowing the use of a neonicotinoid on sugar beet crops in the UK despite promising to ban it when campaigning for the general election.

However, ministers are facing growing calls from green groups to stop emergency authorisations in the UK and enforce a total ban on bee-killing pesticides.

More than 1.6 million people have so far signed a Greenpeace petition backing this call.

A UK Government spokesperson said: “This Government is committed to protecting human health and the environment from the risks posed by chemicals.

“The UK goes beyond the international standard for exports of paraquat and diquat, requiring the explicit consent of the importing country before export can take place.

“This enables the importing country to make informed decisions about the import of those chemicals and how to handle them safely.

“Requirements for the export of hazardous chemicals are agreed at international level under the Rotterdam Convention and we are working closely with the international community to develop best practice and improve the management of these chemicals.”

Sorry, we are not accepting comments on this article.