REACH is a European Union regulation that governs the usage of chemicals and manages their impact on human health and the natural environment. It is a divisive piece of legislation that is currently up for review.
REACH is another EU law where you could argue that the acronym was thought up before what it actually stands for was devised. In this case, it is the 'registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals' regulation.
It has been in place since 2007 and requires businesses within the EU to register and manage the safety of any chemicals they produce, use or import into the bloc. This is all monitored by the European Chemicals Agency, which coordinates national authorities.
REACH is supposed to protect people from harmful substances, safeguard industrial competitiveness and promote innovation in the sector, so that potentially dangerous chemicals can be replaced with safer alternatives.
If certain chemicals are higher risk then they can be labelled as substances of very high concern (SVHCs). These include certain fire retardants and lead, which have uses in specific processes.
Chemicals can also find their way directly onto a restricted list, where their use is banned either completely or in certain applications in the EU.
Asbestos fibres are a complete no-go due to their destructive impact on human health, while substances like nickel and cadmium are not allowed to be used in any products that come in direct contact with people.
The EU institutions have been trying to reform REACH over the last couple of years but it has proven to be a tricky process, as its rules are extremely divisive. Industry wants more leniency, while civil society wants the regulation to be tougher.
Efforts to review the legislation using the normal process, where the European Commission, Council and Parliament all have a say over what changes should be made, have largely stalled.
The Commission itself has also been unable to decide whether to embark on a full review – potentially turning REACH into a Pandora’s Box – or to stick to small amendments here and there.
Changing priorities in Brussels have also played their part: whereas before Green Deal and environmental principles topped the agenda, now industrial competitiveness has taken over as the main concern.
That is why the Commission is now considering whether to use a separate legislative tool in its arsenal called comitology, which would largely sideline the Council and Parliament, in favour of behind-closed-doors decisionmaking.
Comitology has its fans and its critics. On the one hand, it is seen as undemocratic and lacking in transparency, as it shuts out lawmakers and civil society from the review process. Yet on the other, it can potentially de-politicise what is arguably a technical issue.
