\u00a0<\/p>\n
Key Insights<\/p>\n
A public consultation on the UK government\u2019s proposal<\/a> to base some of its chemical approvals on the work done by \u201ctrusted foreign jurisdictions\u201d closed earlier this month. But experts question how decisions will be made to avoid dangerous substances being imported, manufactured, and used domestically.\u00a0<\/p>\n The Labour government has presented the proposal as part of a wider policy to make the British economy more competitive<\/a> by \u201creducing costs to business.\u201d<\/p>\n The proposal, presented by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), states that \u201ca list of countries, jurisdictions and other bodies would be deemed trusted jurisdictions where it can be established that regulatory standards for biocides are similar to and at least as high as those in Great Britain.\u201d While government approval through a current two-step process for other chemicals is considered rather \u201cstraightforward,\u201d the proposal to recognize international approvals would significantly streamline the procedure for biocides.<\/p>\n The proposal comes as the UK presses on in its transition from the European Union\u2019s (EU\u2019s) regulatory framework on chemicals to establish its own regulations since leaving the regional group in 2020.\u00a0<\/p>\n But experts question how these \u201ctrusted\u201d jurisdictions would be selected, with some concerned that these may include countries where dangerous substances are authorized.<\/p>\n A focus on maintaining high standards<\/p>\n Stephanie Metzger, policy adviser at the Royal Society of Chemistry, which contributed comments during the consultation, says she and her colleagues questioned \u201chow other jurisdictions would be evaluated, who will be doing the evaluation, and how will they monitor any changes to ensure their partners are still eligible for the list over time. We want to make sure the partners are still upholding standards we feel are appropriate and that we deem to be high quality and scientifically rigorous.\u201d<\/p>\n She recognizes that \u201cinternational collaboration is really important, in particular with a partner like the EU that we used to work with quite heavily, and we have high trust in their system.\u201d Working together may also \u201chelp align us better with our trading partners and reduce work burdens for our regulators.\u201d The EU remains the UK\u2019s biggest chemicals trading partner<\/a>.<\/p>\n The \u201cproposals are not intended to lower regulatory standards or reduce the governance of chemicals on the market in GB [Great Britain],\u201d a spokesperson for the HSE tells C&EN in an email.<\/p>\n \u201cThe proposal to recognise biocidal approvals granted by other countries (\u2018trusted jurisdictions\u2019) is intended to remove the duplicative processes (and the associated evaluation costs) in situations where the scientific work required to approve an active substance or biocidal product has already been carried out to an appropriate standard in another jurisdiction.\u201d The HSE \u201cwill not regard a jurisdiction as trusted if its regulatory standards are lower than those in Great Britain.\u201d\u202f<\/p>\n