Bridges Trade BioRes • Volume 6 • Number 7 • 14th April 2006

EU Biotech Debate Breaks Out Into the Open

Discuss this articleShare your views with other visitors, and read what they have to say

The EU procedures for risk assessment and approval of biotech products were the subject of intense scrutiny at a meeting of the EU Executive Council in Brussels on 12 April. An internal paper tabled by EU Environment Minister Stavros Dimas and Health and Consumer Protection Commissioner Markos Kyprianou contained specific recommendations on changes to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) that aimed to restore the confidence of EU-25 governments on approvals of biotech products. Under the changes proposed by the Commission, the EFSA is asked to consider the long-term, and not just the short-term, effects of genetically modified organisms (GMOs); fully co-operate with member states’ national scientific bodies; and to provide them with a detailed justification if it decides to rejects scientific objections raised by the national authorities. In the document, the Commission also gives itself the right to suspend the authorisation procedure and refer the assessment back to EFSA if a member state raises “important new scientific questions” which are not fully addressed by the EFSA opinion. Commission spokesperson Pia Ahrenkilde Hansen stressed that while the new procedures did not mark a major shift in the EU approval process, the Commission wanted to avoid “undue delays” in GMO approvals, a possible reference to the recent WTO ruling on the application of EU biotech rules (see Bridges Trade BioRes, 17 February 2006). In related developments, Austria imposed a two-year ban on imports of Monsanto’s GT73 oilseed rape the day after the EU decision, notwithstanding the fact that the GMO had been approved by the European Commission on 31 August 2005 and that criticisms were made of other Austrian GMO bans in the WTO preliminary biotech ruling. Concerns raised by the Austrian Council of environment ministers included the lack of long-term toxicity and allergenicity tests and the potential for the unintentional spread of the variety as a result of cross-breeding with conventional crops if imported in large quantities along transport routes.

The EU press release outlining changes to the scientific evaluation and decision-making processes used in the trading block, entitled “Commission proposes practical improvements to the way the European GMO legislative framework is implemented,” can be viewed at http://europa.eu.int/press_room/index_en.htm

For additional information on Austria’s decision on GT73, visit http://www.bmgf.gv.at/cms/site/detail.htm?thema=CH0255&doc=CMS1144914646396

“Cracks start to show in EU GMO policy,” EURACTIV, 6 April 2006; ” EU Commissioners Split on Genetically-Modified Food,” REUTERS, 6 April 2006; ” Safety Checks on GMOs Flawed - EU Environment Chief,” REUTERS, 6 April 2006; ” Biotech industry accuses GM conference of lacking balance,” NEUTRAINGREDIENTS, 5 April 2006; ” Stage set for EU food safety overhaul over GMOs,” INDIAN EXPRESS, 7 April 2006; ” Biotech companies lobby EU to keep current GM crop rules,” AP, 7 April 2006; “EU Vows Clarity on GMOs, Eyes End to Deadlock,” REUTERS, 13 April 2006; “Commission for more transparency on GMO decisions,” EURACTIV, 13 April 2006.