EU member states are missing an opportunity to make toys safer

EU member states are missing an opportunity to make toys safer

Image: PxHere

EU member states are missing an opportunity to make toys saferOn May 15, the EU Member States adopted a negotiating mandate to revise the Toys Directive, which does not fully protect children from harmful chemicals. Following the European Parliament’s very ambitious stance earlier this year, the Council’s mandate was not up to the challenge.

The member states did not include a group ban on bisphenols and the “eternal chemicals” PFAS, as decided by the Parliament. They have also not tightened the exemptions from the generic ban; this approach would have ensured that chemicals are immediately banned from toys as soon as they prove to be harmful.



The Council also did not follow the Parliament’s position by deciding that only classified chemicals would be restricted under the generic bans. This means that substances must first go through a classification process under a different EU law (Classification, Labeling and Packaging Regulation). This differs from the generic prohibition process under the main EU chemicals safety legislation (REACH). This procedure covers “compliant” chemicals and in principle allows chemicals to be restricted if they are classified by the industry itself or if data proves their harmfulness.


Endocrine disruptors

The Council retained the Commission’s proposal to remove endocrine disruptors from toys, but specified that only endocrine disruptors that affect human health should be covered.


CHEM Trust

CHEM Trust urges the co-legislators to address these shortcomings in the Council’s mandate and to reach an ambitious agreement during the trilogues that should be as close as possible to the Parliament’s position. The trilogues are scheduled to start as early as the fourth quarter of 2024.

Source: CHEM Trust
Also read: The deadline for the PCN transitional arrangement is approaching!

This information has been compiled with the greatest possible care, in some cases from different information sources. (Interpretation) errors are not excluded. No legal obligation can therefore be derived from this text. Everyone dealing with this subject has the responsibility to delve into the matter!