Trying to sow the seeds of certainty over GM crops

Date: 10/03/05

European commissioners will debate their policy on genetically modified (GM) products - on 22 March amid increasing pressure to set a clear EU position. Health Commissioner Markos Kyprianou is expected to ask his colleagues how the EU's approval procedure can be tightened up to force member states to take a greater role in decision-making.

The commissioner has expressed concern that the current approval regime pushes all the responsibility onto the EU executive, making the process appear unbalanced as well as extremely lengthy. As it stands, once the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) rules a GM crop safe the Commission asks a regulatory committee, composed of member states' authorities, to approve or reject it.

But wildly differing views among member states have meant that, since a de facto moratorium was lifted last summer, the committee has not had a sufficient majority either way to approve or reject a GM. As a result, the Commission has had to pass proposals to the Council of Ministers, where discussions have also consistently ended in stalemate, forcing the Commission to make the final choice. The EU executive has approved two strains of GM maize since the moratorium ended.

Putting further pressure on the system is the fact that five member states - Austria, France, Germany, Greece and Luxembourg - still have national safeguards in place. These allow them to restrict or ban the use of a GM product if there are "justifiable" reasons to believe that they may not be safe.

The regulatory committee has so far failed to get the required qualified majority of member states to lift these safeguards, despite the fact that EFSA has concluded the bans are based on insufficient evidence.

Kyprianou told journalists in January that he wanted member states to take more of the responsibility for approving a GM product and he is expected to ask the other commissioners how this might be done.

The EU executive is already under pressure to open up its markets to GM foods as a consortium of third countries including Argentina, Canada and the United States are pursuing a World Trade Organization (WTO) case from August 2003 that the EU broke trade law by blocking imports of GM crops. An initial verdict on the case is expected on 13 May.

A US official said that America was pushing for the Commission to change its approval procedure. "It is not functioning as the Commission wanted; it should be the Council [of Ministers] taking the decisions and it isn't," he said, adding that the EU executive should "establish some jurisprudence that enforces the role of scientific basis in the proceedings".

But member states continue to be divided on the issue of GM and any proposed changes to the rules of approval could take a long time to be adopted.

"It took years to establish the rules as they are now," said one Commission official. "Is it really realistic to open the whole thing again?"

Simon Barber, director of plant biotechnology at EU bioindustry association Europabio said: "We would just like the Commission to uphold the legislation that member states themselves agreed on. There is no doubt that there are some delegations that are opposed to GM whatever they are told."

But campaigners against GM argue that the Commission should support national positions. "There are so many regions going GM-free now that pressure is turning back to the Commission to recognise the opposition," says Adrian Bebb of Friends of the Earth.

At the meeting, commissioners will also consider their approach to co-existence - how GM crops are cultivated alongside non-GM crops. Members of Commissioner Mariann Fischer Boel's entourage say that the agriculture chief is in favour of an EU legal framework, but that this would be difficult to impose given the varying degrees of acceptance across the Union.

The EU executive will produce a report on national planting regulations by the end of the year on which Fischer Boel will base any future legislation.

"She is very pragmatic about this issue," said one EU official. "She recognises that GM crops are here and that they must be dealt with. There is no question of trying to cancel GM."

Member states are currently free to regulate as they wish the sowing of GM crops and in the face of consumer opposition to the technology, more and more regions are demanding protection from their governments against contamination. According to Friends of the Earth more than 100 regions in Europe have declared themselves GM-free zones. Next Thursday (17 March) the European Court of Justice will hear an appeal by Upper Austria over its right to claim legal GM-free status from the Commission. The Brussels executive rejected the request in September 2003 on the grounds that Austria had provided neither sufficient evidence against GM nor proof that the region had a specific problem.

Though Austrian officials are not hopeful about the outcome, they are confident it will draw attention to the issue. "Even if there is a negative outcome the court might show other regions how to present their case for the next time," said one diplomat.

Article reports on the current developments regarding genetically modified maize in the European Union. The issue was to be debated by the European Commission on 22 March 2005 and on 17 March 2005 the European Court of Justice was to hear an appeal by Upper Austria over its right to claim legal GM-free status from the European Commission.