Bridges Trade BioRes • Volume 3 • Number 19 • 31st October 2003
GMO UPDATE: EU SEED LAW; NZ MORATORIUM; UK
GMO UPDATE: EU SEED LAW; NZ MORATORIUM; UK
EU delays adoption of seed law
The European Commission has delayed a decision on new rules for the purity of seeds, including thresholds for the presence of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), which the Standing Committee on Seeds was scheduled to vote on at its 27-28 October meeting. Under a new procedure established by the Commission, the rules will now need to be adopted first under the EU Directive on the deliberate release of GMOs into the environment and will then be submitted to the Seed Committee. This, the Commission noted, would help to avoid "legal inconsistencies" and provide an additional environmental check. This decision has effectively delayed the adoption of the new rules by about 6 months, but they are hoped to be in place by early 2004.
Still to be resolved are labelling thresholds for the presence of GMOs in seeds, with 0.3-0.7 percent proposed by the Commission depending on the seeds. GMO-sceptic countries, such as Austria and Italy, would like to see the threshold lowered to 0.1 percent for conventional crops, with Italy calling for a zero percent threshold for organic crops. These tighter thresholds are also supported by environmental groups, which have welcomed the postponement and revised procedure as an acknowledgement that the issue should be looked at from an environmental perspective. The industry association EuropaBio, however, expressed their discontent with the delay to implement "much needed rules" to ensure fair and open markets for approved products in the EU.
A Commission official noted that the delay should not affect EU member states’ decision on authorising new GMOs and thereby ending the current de facto moratorium. Syngenta’s Bt-11 maize is the first item up for a vote, possibly as early as November.
New Zealand ends moratorium
New Zealand has ended its moratorium on the approval of GMOs on 29 October with the entry into force of amendments to the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996, the main legislation covering GMOs. The revisions introduce the category of "conditional release" to complement the options of full approval or rejection available under the old legislation. Thus, under the new rules, the Environmental Risk Management Authority will be able to attach controls for the release of GM organisms on a case-by-case basis, such as requiring certain planting distances between GMOs and conventional crops. These will be enforced through strict liability rules. "We put in place the moratorium on applications specifically so that we could strengthen the legislation and improve the way it worked for new organisms," said New Zealand’s Environment Minster Marian Hobbs.
New Zealand is one of the third parties in the WTO dispute initiated by the US, Argentina and Canada against the EU’s de facto moratorium on the approvals of new GMOs, in place since 1998 while the EU was revising its regulatory framework for GMOs (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 30 June 2003, http://www.ictsd.org/biores/03-06-30/story1.htm). All Members with "a substantial interest" in a dispute can join as third parties, which gives them the right to be heard by the panel, make written submissions and receive the submissions of other parties to the first panel meeting. As one trade source pointed out, New Zealand has a systemic interest in the interpretation of the Agreement on the Application of the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS), which will likely be discussed in the context of the dispute. The trade source noted that New Zealand’s moratorium was different from the EU’s de facto moratorium, as it had been instituted for a very specific reason and timeframe in response to the extensive consultation process under the New Zealand Royal Commission on Genetic Modification.
For more information on the dispute, see the ICTSD website.
UK: Co-op bans GMOs from its businesses
The UK-based Co-op has announced that it would ban GMOs from all its businesses, including food retailing, farms and dairy manufacturing, following a survey showing that four-fifths of its customers would not willingly buy food containing GM ingredients. Thus, the co-operative society will not grow GM crops on its 85,000 acres of farms, sell GM food under its own brand, feed its animals with GM feed or invest bank customers’ money in GM technology. "On the strength of current scientific knowledge, and the overwhelming opposition of our members, the Co-op is saying no to the commercial growing of GM crops in the UK," said Martin Beaumont, the group’s chief executive. This decision is likely to put pressure on other supermarkets to follow suit. The retail chain "Iceland" already banned the use of GM ingredients in its own-label products in 1998 and Tesco, the UK’s biggest supermarket chain, uses non-GM feed for poultry, eggs and fish. Co-op’s announcement comes at a time as the national GM dialogue in the UK is drawing to a close, which was meant to inform the UK government’s decision on the future of GM technology in the country (see BRIDGE Trade BioRes, 3 October 2003).
"EU rethinks strategy on agreeing gene seed rules," REUTERS, 23 October 2003; "New legal basis may lead to stricter rules for GMOs in seeds," EURACTIV, 24 October 2003; "New GM legislation in force as moratorium expires," NZ PRESS RELEASE, 29 October 2003; "Co-op goes GM-free," BBC, 21 October 2003; "Britain’s Co-op supermarket group rejects GM crops," REUTERS, 22 October 2003.