UK to wait for Europe PFAS response, government tells environment committee

The government published its response to the environmental audit committee’s findings into the risks from perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances – PFAS, known commonly as forever chemicals – and resisted calls for urgent action on restrictions to non-essential usage.

The environmental audit committee’s report, published in April, made 20 recommendations for regulatory change, including reforming the UK REACH regulatory framework for registration, evaluation, authorisation, and restriction of chemicals by March 2027 to avoid further delay in restricting PFAS.

It also recommended the UK adopts an “essential-use approach to regulating PFAS” with priority given to imposing rapid restrictions on non-essential applications.

Despite the recommendations from the committee, however, the government said it was waiting to see how Europe legislated around the chemicals before progressing its own legislation.

The response notes: “We are already working to reform UK REACH so that restrictions can be applied more quickly, more efficiently and in a way that is more closely aligned with our closest trading partner, the EU.

“This would represent a different approach from the current process, rather than simply reducing the maximum timescales within the existing statutory model.

“We intend to draw from EU regulatory decisions unless there are compelling reasons to diverge. In this context, EU regulatory decisions include final EU REACH restrictions. In so doing, we will retain full control over our regulatory decisions.”

Katie Hancock, an environmental litigation expert with Pinsent Masons, said the government's response was unsurprising, and reflected the practical difficulty of developing a proportionate regulatory framework for such a diverse group of substances.

“While concerns relating to environmental persistence and potential health impacts continue to drive calls for restrictions, policymakers face the equally important challenge of identifying where viable and safe alternatives actually exist,” she explained.

“Many PFAS applications remain critical to sectors such as healthcare, electronics, energy infrastructure and industrial manufacturing. The decision to monitor and draw upon developments within the EU is therefore understandable.

“Given the scale and complexity of the proposed European restrictions, businesses would benefit from as much regulatory alignment as possible, reducing the risk of divergent compliance obligations across closely connected markets.”

PFAS refers to a classification of around 10,000 fluorinated chemicals with a variety of purposes, but which can make products resistant to oil, water or heat – giving them a wide range of applications in fields such as clothing, healthcare, food and drink packaging and cleaning chemicals. However, some PFAS chemicals degrade very slowly, leading to the ‘forever chemicals’ nickname.

The government confirmed it was looking at both regulatory and non-regulatory approaches to managing PFAS in consumer products in response to the recommendations, including a Food Standards Agency review of a maximum level for PFAS traces in food, pending a review by the committee on toxicity.

Earlier this year, the government published its PFAS Plan, which sets out its long-term approach in relation to the chemicals grouping, with a view to taking a science-based and proportionate approach “in partnership” with industry to reduce and minimise the impacts of harmful PFAS on public health and the environment.

To meet this vision, the government intends to act under three central ‘pillars’: understanding more about the sources of PFAS; accounting for their movement around society and the environment; and reducing ongoing exposure to PFAS for people, animals and the environment.

Zoe Betts, a health and safety expert with Pinsent Masons, highlighted there were likely to be some restrictions around usage of the chemicals in the near future.

“The plan does accept that some restrictions on use of PFAS could be pursued in the short-term, including the Health and Safety Executive’s (HSE’s) proposed ban on PFAS in fire fighting foam (FFF),” she explained.

“The HSE’s consultation on its proposals for restrictions on PFAS in FFF closed in February 2026. It has now published a further consultation on those proposals seeking stakeholder views on the socio-economic consequences of them. This consultation is open until 7 September 2026 and will inform the HSE’s final opinion, which is expected later in 2026. The government’s decision on the restriction is expected in 2027”.

Hancock said the plan looks to balance the critical use of some such substances for societal benefit and the availability of viable alternatives against the potential risks to human health and the environment.

“The government's PFAS Plan appears to recognise that a science-based and risk-based approach is needed, distinguishing between uses that may justify restriction in the near term and those where substitution remains technically or economically challenging,” she said.

Betts added: “As further consultations progress, particularly in relation to firefighting foams and consumer products, continued engagement with industry will be essential to ensure that regulatory objectives are achieved without creating unintended consequences for innovation, supply chains or the availability of important products.”

Meanwhile the government has also recently announced a review of chemical exposure risks in toys.

A call for evidence looking at harmful risks in toy safety, including through chemical usage and the use of AI, has been launched, with views from parents, consumer groups, businesses and enforcement authorities being canvassed until 6 October.

Among the proposals being consulted on are extending the existing ban on carcinogenic and mutagenic substances, along with substances toxic for reproduction, to include PFAS and the most dangerous types of bisphenols – which can disrupt health.