Environmental groups were dismayed after a deal on the EU's chemicals safety law saw defenders of business interests obtaining success on most of their core issues.

For the Socialist Group, Guido Sacconi said that the compromise on the table "will lead to a balanced system, capable of securing a high level of public health and environmental protection while maintaining the competitiveness of the European industry and boosting innovation and the development of safer chemicals".

Ria Oomen-Ruijten MEP, who led the negotiations for the EPP-ED, the largest group in Parliament, said she obtained "success on core issues" adding: "I am willing to defend this compromise. EPP-ED proposals were taken on board to get rid of much of the red tape so the directive will be less bureaucratic." "We also improved also the protection of confidential business information," she added, by "preventing that years of expensive research becomes worthless because key information to produce new chemicals are made public for all during the registration process".

Chris Davies MEP from the Liberal democrats (ALDE) said the most important is that companies will from now on have to prove that their substances are safe. But he lambasted at the Commission and Germany for blocking progress in the negotiations. "The gorilla in the room for the past few years has been Germany," Davies said, indicating that it successfully managed to find cross-party support to block a more stringent bill. "The gorilla's sister has been the Commission," Davies added, pointing to infighting between the environment and enterprise directorates which left it "so divided that they preferred keeping silent rather than betray their directorates".

The Commission, whose role as a deal-maker was criticised during the entire negotiation process, said that it welcomed the deal. "It is a marked improvement of the present situation regarding health and environment," said Commissioners Dimas (environment) and Verheugen (enterprise and industry).

The Greens in Parliament were deeply disappointed, saying that MEPs had "sold out to intense lobbying from the German chemicals industry". "Back-door politics on the part of the chemicals industry, both through specific countries in the Council and, particularly, through its parliament proxy the EPP, has finally triumphed," the Greens said in a statement. "Under the deal, the duty to carry out a substitution plan is mandatory, however, not the duty to act on that plan. Another flaw is that the person responsible for drafting the plan is the producer, so it is highly unlikely they will draft a plan which is inimical to their interests."

Environmental groups were furious and called on MEPs to reject the compromise. "The deal will allow many chemicals of very high concern - including many that cause cancer, birth defects and other serious illnesses - to stay on the market and be used in consumer products even when safer alternatives are available".

Ninja Reineke, Senior Toxics Programme Officer with the WWF described the compromise as "a disgrace" with "more or less voluntary" regulation from businesses. "There is no clear process, no clear aim for substitution," she said.

An unprecedented level of lobbying by the European chemical industry has resulted in a compromise that fails to adequately protect the health of workers, says the European Trade Union Confederation. The workers’ body said that the “final backwards step,” for workers is the decision that companies will only have to report on substances produced in volumes of at least 10 tons per year or more. Workers who are exposed to an estimated 20,000 substances produced in quantities of between 1 and 10 tons will therefore have no access to information that is “crucial to their safety,” pointed out the ETUC.