On 02/06/16 22:49, Martin wrote:
On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 19:59:30 +0100, Jeff Layman wrote:

On 02/06/16 19:18, David Rance wrote:
On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 16:26:30 Martin wrote:

On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 15:03:54 +0100, Big Les Wade wrote:

Latest from Commission he
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release...16-2011_en.htm

For those unaccustomed to Eurospeak, it says:

SNIP

It is in normal English. We don't need your interpretation.

Yes we do. It was an excellent précis.

David

Yes and no. What I think Les missed was the interesting comment
"minimise the use of the substance in public parks, public playgrounds
and gardens". Now I thought it had been decided that glyphosate was to
be *banned* from public use, and that decision had already been made. If
so, why is the word "minimised" used, rather than "stop"?

It isn't banned yet, but will be unless 100% of member states agree to allow it
before July 1st.

The phrase you mention was one of three recommendations to be made if the use is
approved to continue after July 1st.

Sorry - I'm a bit confused here. You mentioned in an earlier thread that
glyphosate had been banned in The Netherlands for non-professional use.
According to your comment, unless *all* MS agree to allow it, then it
will be banned throughout the EU. So is this effectively a negative
veto? If one MS doesn't want it, and the rest do, it is banned? And if
one MS wants it, and all the rest don't, it is banned? Looks like
one-sided democracy to me.

--

Jeff