Split remains over labelling ‘novel’ foods

Date: 03/10/1996

By Simon Coss

DEEP divisions between MEPs and the Council of Ministers over a proposed directive on 'novel' foods have delayed conciliation talks aimed at reaching a compromise.

The two sides were originally due to begin discussions in September, but talks will not now begin until later this month.

Parliamentary officials say the two sides are still so far apart on the issue that calling a formal meeting now would simply be a waste of time.

The decision to set up a conciliation committee was taken in early July after the Council of Ministers rejected MEPs' calls for changes to a proposed directive on the labelling of novel foods such as genetically-modified fruit and vegetables.

The argument between the two institutions centres on the detail which should be included on labels for novel foods.

MEPs maintain that all genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) in food should be clearly indicated. This could mean, for example, that bread made from wheat grown from seeds which have been genetically modified to resist disease should be labelled as containing GMOs.

The Council argues that such detailed labelling is unnecessary as the GMOs involved, in this case the seeds, do not affect the taste or quality of the final product, the bread, in any discernible way. Ministers say labelling is only necessary if the food or ingredient is “significantly different” because of any GMOs it may contain.

Under the co-decision procedure, of which conciliation committees are an integral part, any deal struck between the two sides must be approved by the full Parliament - and MEPs could still reject the compromise if they are unhappy with it.

This has happened on one occasion, when the Parliament rejected a compromise on EU-wide biotechnology legislation in March 1995, forcing the European Commission to come forward with a new proposal.