Is Neem illegal in the UK?

This is an extract from a Wikipedia site:
'In the UK, plant protection products that contain azadirachtin, the active ingredient of neem oil, are illegal.' There's a link to a Government website but i couldn't access it. Why would this ingredient in Neem be classified ilegal when it's easily available to buy from online retailers? Strange.

 

Thanks Shiney,

i just did a little more research into what could be a reason and found some interesting writings regarding my quiery. This is a translated transcript which seems relevant, i've highlighted the related section which, interesting as it is, beggers belief, i'm sure that companies like Monsanto manage to stay in business because of the difficulties faced by small companies who wish to sell organic products but cannot afford to go through the lengthy and expensive testing procedures. Sounds like corporate government accepts a system whereby it's better to spray poisons like Round Up than organic alternatives:

11.3238 - Motion
Ordinance on Plant Protection Products. Future products used in organic farming

Deposited by
Francine John-Calame
Francine John-Calame
Date of filing
18.03.2011
Deposited in
National Council
State of deliberations
Liquidated

Text filed
The Federal Council is committed to change the ordinance governing the approval of plant protection products in order to introduce a clause to the effect that the products used in treatments based on natural vegetable or mineral substances are exempt from the approval procedure provided for the agrochemical industry or such approval is carried out by a body of control and certification of organic farming in the service, as Ecocert.

Motivation
Currently some products are approved by the FOAG agrochemical industry although recognized as toxic and carcinogenic. Some of them are even distributed via helicopters flying over the vineyards (chlorotal). Natural products such as leachate nettle or neem oil may, however, be banned because people using them do not have the necessary financial means to get them approved. The approval procedures are lengthy, complex and expensive, and only the agrochemical corporations have the means required to fulfill this obligation.

The lack of recognition of natural products will determine the loss of knowledge and ancient techniques the illegality of so-called traditional treatments.

In the European Union, in the name of prevention of fraud, a French horticulturist was raided and the contents of his computer seized for having advertised slurry nettle to treat the garden.

A French company was sentenced for selling unauthorized horsetail EU.

Some French organic farmers have been accused of promoting a "pesticide banned" which is none other than the neem oil or neem oil which the Indians have used for years as a pesticide.

In Canada, a law passed in 2008, Bill C-51, criminalizes the use of medicinal plants and can lead to imprisonment in the case of simple herbs growing in their garden.

Opinion of the Federal Council of 11.05.2011
The new ordinance of 12 May 2010 on plant protection products (RS 916,161) strengthens the provisions concerning the safety of products used to protect crops against pests and diseases. There is maintained the principle, already in force, compulsory authorization for the placing on the market, which applies to all active substances of synthetic or natural origin. With the ordinance on plant protection products you do not want to limit the means of struggle available to organic farming, but you want to ensure that the use of plant protection products, chemical or natural, does not pose a risk to humans and the environment .

All crop protection products are biologically active and may have side effects on the bodies not affected by the fighting. The same goes for natural substances used as plant protection product. Side effects depend on the strength of biological action (toxicity), but also from the exposure of non-target organisms. Permissions are granted on the basis of the assessment of the risk of side effects. Under the conditions of use of the product are set out measures that reduce the risk; if these are not sufficient, the permission is not granted.

Pesticides must meet high requirements. The person placing a product on the market has to prove that the same fulfills these requirements, which can cause high costs for research, which could serve as a deterrent to the marketing of some products, such as plant extracts. The ordinance on plant protection products already contains several provisions which aim to limit as much as possible these costs, through, above all, recognition of the files of questions presented to the EU and taking account of the risk assessments carried out by foreign authorities.

The procedure could be simplified further by making a list of plants or minerals, whose extracts may be marketed without authorization. The Department of Economic Affairs will evaluate the possibility of integrating such a provision in the order. This list could in any case contain only plants or minerals whose harmlessness is ascertained, such as certain foodstuffs, and this definitely is not the case for all plant extracts (eg nicotine or rotenone). A total exemption from the approval procedure for all extracts of plants or minerals would no longer guarantee the safe use of the product, either in conventional or in biological evolution. The EU Regulation 1107/2009 introduces the concept of basic substances that can be placed on the market without authorization. In case you prepare the above list, you should also take into account the decisions of the EU.

The federal government has the necessary scientific expertise to carry out the evaluation of these products; it is not therefore necessary, from the viewpoint of economic or scientific, a delegation to an organ of control and certification.

Proposal of the Federal Council of 11.05.2011
The Federal Council proposes to reject the motion.


Documents
Official Bulletin - The debates

 

There are usually two sides to every story.

While the EU is frequently a bit daft with the rules, and companieslike Monsanto exploit various laws that seem silly, there is a flip side.

We must remember that 'natural' or 'organic' is not the same as 'safe'. The Ebola virus is both natural and organic, as are crocodiles, death cap mushrooms,and a whole host of other dangerous things.

When we use essential oils of plants for various things, we must remember that sometimes, the ingredients of those essential oils are in fact the plant's natural defensive poison to ward off pests.

When we buy some product or other, it is nice to know that it has been comprehensively tested and found to be suitable for the job. More importantly, it's nice to know that if used as directed, exhaustive testing has shown that it will do no harm.

All that costs money. If I were to spend thousands or millions on research and development, trials and licensing, I'd want to know that someone else can't just buy a bottle of my product, analyse it, copy it, and sell it in direct competition with me, such that I can't recover my involvement.

I'm not saying I'm on either side. If people want to use their own concoctions in their own gardens, I say go for it. But I can see why there are tight controls on selling it or promoting it. As for controls on using it, the law is there but I can't imagine it being enforced when it's someone in their own garden. I think it's there just to create options if people start spraying gallons of unregistered and untested product right next door to a commercial corn field say.

 

I don't mean to drag out this post but i thought this may be useful to anyone using Neem and possibly answers my first question:
http://risk-monger.blogactiv.eu/2015/06/17/save-the-bees-ban-these-two-toxic-pesticides-immediately/