Bridges Trade BioRes • Volume 9 • Number 3 • 20th February 2009

EC Fails to Lift GM Maize Bans in France, Greece

Do More

Subscribe to the BioRes

* Required Field

Email Address: *

Country: *

Employment Sector (Academia, Govt., Private Sector, NGO, IGO): *

First Name:

Last Name:

Organisation:

Enter the letters shown above:*

Download this issue

Volume 9 Number 3 PDF • 0.2 MB

French and Grecian fields will remain free of genetically modified (GM) crops for the time being after the European Commission (EC) failed in its bid to force the two countries to lift their controversial bans. The bans target MON810, an insect-resistant strain of maize manufactured by GM heavyweight Monsanto. It is currently the only GM crop approved for cultivation in the EU.

Despite being deemed safe by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Greece invoked a ‘safeguard clause’ in 2006 to keep MON810 seeds out of the country and France followed suit last year (see Bridges Trade BioRes, 25 January, 2008, http://ictsd.net/i/news/biores/9357/). Because the safeguard clause is designed to be a temporary measure, the bans must be perpetually extended.

The EC has been under pressure by the WTO to address the non-compliance of these countries on the issue. The WTO argues that the national bans are effectively denying market access allowed under trade rules to countries that use biotechnology in agriculture.

Qualified majority elusive

In April 2008 the EC asked the EFSA to advise them on the scientific grounding of the ban imposed by Greece. The body responded three months later, saying that scientific evidence does not support Greece’s argument that MON810 has any adverse effect on human and animal health and the environment.

The EC asked the EFSA to consider the French case on the same grounds. On 29 October 2008 the Authority returned its decision, saying that no new data had arisen since its previous evaluation of MON810 and that the results of its previous risk assessment would stand.

In light of this, the Commission had presented the EFSA decisions to the Standing Committee requesting Greece and France to repeal their national prohibitions.

The issue came to a head when the EC presented the EFSA evidence to the Standing Committee on food chain and animal health representing all 27 EU member states. On 16 February the committee announced that it was unable to establish the qualified majority - 62 percent or more of the EU population - needed to lift or uphold the bans. In the vote, 9 of the 27 EU member states supported the call to lift the bans, while 16 countries abstained. Germany and Malta did not take part in the vote, Agence France-Presse reported.

Background

The current EU system of approval for agricultural biotechnology was established after several member states pushed back against an EU decision to approve the Monsanto maize in question in 1998. This friction led the EC to develop a new legal framework aimed at ensuring rigorous safety controls developed from a transparent risk-assessment analysis.

The framework that arose from the 1998 squabble came into force in 2004. The system allows the EU to approve GM crops for all EU member states if there is no scientific evidence showing health or environmental dangers. Approvals, handled under the auspices of the EFSA, can also be revisited if new evidence calls the safety of a given crop into question. France seized on this provision when it banned the maize in January of last year after a national report revealed concerns. However, the EFSA said that the newly proposed evidence did not “invalidate the previous risk assessments of maize MON810.”

While the Monsanto maize is now approved for use in all but the four countries that have imposed national bans, only seven countries currently harvest it.

France defiant

The French case, in particular, has drawn criticism by some GM proponents, who argue that the country’s decision is politically motivated, rather than scientifically. Prior to the country’s decision to ban MON810 in 2008, it had been a major cultivator of the GM crop. However, the government implemented the ban after an internal expert report revealed concerns that MON810 had an effect on insects, a species of earthworm, and micro-organisms. It also concluded that wind-blown pollen from MON810 crops could contaminate non-GM crops as far as hundreds of kilometres away.

However, the validity of the report was subsequently called into question after 12 of the 15 scientists who compiled it said that their findings had been misrepresented.

A new report by France’s food and safety committee now contradicts the findings of the controversial report upon which the initial ban was based. The 23 January report had been suppressed until a copy was leaked to French newspaper Le Figaro on 5 February.

Following the leak, French Prime Minister Francois Fillon quickly announced that his country’s ban would stay in place regardless of what the EU decided.

What’s next?

The next several months will likely see heated debate on the issue across Europe. However, recent polls suggest that European opposition to GM crops may be softening. Indeed, a recent move by UK supermarket giant Tesco to revisit their decision on GM products suggests that consumers may be more likely to accept such goods than they have been in the past.

Nevertheless, the MON810 issue shows that Europeans and their governments remain deeply divided on the issue. Because the Standing Committee was unable to reach a qualified majority, a decision on the French and Grecian bans now falls on European environment ministers. They have three months in which to consider the cases.

Meanwhile, the Austrian and Hungarian bans on MON810 will come before the environment ministers at a 2 March council meeting. If the ministers are unable to reach the qualified majority needed to make a decision in either decision, the task will fall upon the Commission itself.

The EFSA has now approved two additional GM varieties of maize - Pioneer and Dow Agrosciences’ BT1507 and Syngenta’s BT11 - for European cultivation. These crops are scheduled for discussion by the regulatory committee on 25 February.

In December, the EU adopted a series of measures aimed at overcoming differences among members and helping to facilitate the decision-making process. Perhaps most notable of these recommendations is the suggestion that the EFSA become the union’s final arbiter on the safety of GM crops after taking national concerns into consideration.

ICTSD Reporting; “EU foiled in bid to force France, Greece to allow GM crop,” AFP, 17 February 2009; “European disarray on transgenic crops,” NATURE NEWS, 17 February 2009; “Tesco boss prepares for GM u-turn,” FOOD MANUFACTURE, 2 February 2009; “French agency says Monsanto GMO maize safe: report,” REUTERS, 11 February 2009.