London, United Kingdom
July 13, 2005
A vote took place at the European Union Environment Council
meeting on 24 June to decide on proposals to overturn safeguard
actions taken by a number of Member States on certain approved
GMOs.
The result of the vote was that the eight proposals were
rejected by a qualified majority of EU Environment Ministers.
The UK voted in favour of the Commission’s proposals. Following
the vote EU Environment Ministers have asked the European
Commission to gather further evidence on the GMOs in question
and further assess whether the measures taken by Member States
aimed at suspending as a temporary precautionary measure their
placing on the market are justified. A note of the meeting of
the Environment Council, 24 June 2005 can be found on the
Environment Council website
Many people, inspired by a campaign run by Friends of the Earth,
wrote to Defra Ministers and officials encouraging the UK to
vote against the proposals put forward by the European
Commission. Defra provided the following statement to Friends of
the Earth in response:
Many people have written to Elliot Morley,
Minister of State for
Environment, regarding the vote, at the Environment Council
meeting on 24 June, on the Commission’s proposal to overturn the
safeguard actions taken by a number of Member States on certain
approved GMOs.
As these e-mails were initiated by a campaign on your website we
are responding to you directly and we would be happy for you to
circulate this response to your members who have responded to
your campaign. We will also be putting a statement on our
website - www.defra.gov.uk
The Government strongly supports the agreed EU procedure (set
out in EC Directive 2001/18), for making decisions on specific
GM products. This legislation is fully compatible with the
Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. Each GM application must be
assessed by Member States on a case-by-case basis and decisions
should be taken on the scientific assessment of the potential
risks against the criteria in the Directive.
New evidence may come to light which might warrant a
reassessment of the decision making process by which a GMO was
approved, including the environmental risk assessment. On
presenting such new information to the European Commission a
Member State can legitimately prohibit or restrict the use, in
their countries, of the GMO while the new information is being
considered. Austria, Luxembourg, Germany, France and Greece have
taken actions which they consider to be justified under the EC
legislation.
Further information about the GMOs subject to actions by Member
States can now be found on our website including a brief
description of the GMOs in question and the extent to which they
are used in the EU. [see
table, below]
The UK’s position on GMOs is to assess each GM crop on a
case-by-case basis taking account of the scientific evidence.
With regard to the vote at the Env Council on 24 June the key
issue was whether evidence had been presented in support of the
actions taken by the Member States and whether any such evidence
met the requirements of the directive. The UK Advisory Committee
on Releases to the Environment agreed with the European Food
Safety Authority that no such evidence had been provided. The UK
therefore had no other option but to support the Commission
decisions calling for the safeguard actions invoked under
Article 23 of Directive 2001/18 to be repealed.
The Deliberate Release Directive allows the EU to choose whether
GMOs are placed on the market based on scientific evidence. If
the safety assessment raised significant concerns then a GMO
would not be approved in the EU.
USA, Argentina and Canada filed a complaint with the World Trade
Organisation against the procedures regulating the import and
marketing of GMOs in the European Union. The focus of the
complaints is that the EU has allegedly not been operating its
own approvals system for GM products since 1998. The UK
Government has expressed its disappointment that this action has
been taken which we regard as unjustified, and we are working
with our EU partners to defend the case and find a solution. As
with any WTO dispute we will be bound by the ruling, which will
be reached after due consideration of the evidence. The UK
agrees with the European Commission that existing EU legislation
on GMOs is compatible with trade rules.
Status and current usage of
GMOs subject to safeguard action under Directive 2001/18 in some
EU member states – July 2005
GMO |
EU Approval* |
Cultivation status –
worldwide** |
Cultivation status –
EU** |
EU Import status** |
Art 23 ban in: |
Syngenta Bt176 maize
(insect resistant)
|
In 1997
(via France) for import and cultivation. |
Not
marketed after 2004 (replaced by more modern GM type
Bt11), residual seed stock grown in Canada, (2005 and
2006) for local use as fodder for livestock.
From 1996-2004 grown
extensively in USA, Canada and Argentina. |
Not
marketed after 2004, residual stock of seed sown in
Spain in 2005, (11000 ha).
From 1998-2004, up to
25000 ha grown in Spain each year (4-5% of total maize
acreage) for use locally as fodder. |
None –
adventitious presence only. |
Austria,
Germany & Lux |
Bayer T25 maize
(herbicide tolerant) |
In 1998
(via France) for import and cultivation. |
Grown in
USA (2% of maize acreage) and Argentina |
Never
grown commercially in EU |
Yes,
mainly as processed products, eg maize gluten feed
|
Austria |
Monsanto MON810 maize
(insect resistant) |
In 1998
(via France) for import and cultivation. |
Grown
extensively in USA, Canada and Argentina |
Grown in
Spain, (75000 ha in 2005) Portugal, France (1000ha) and
Germany |
Yes,
mainly as processed products, maize gluten feed etc |
Austria |
Bayer MS1/RF1 oil-seed
rape (herbicide tolerant)
|
In 1997
(via UK) and in 1998 (via Fr). For import and
cultivation. |
No longer
marketed (replaced by more modern type MS8/RF3), last
grown in Canada in 2003. |
Never
grown commercially in EU |
None –
adventitious presence only |
France |
Bayer Topaz 19/2 oil
seed rape (herbicide tolerant) |
In 1998
(via UK) for import only. |
No longer
marketed, last grown in Canada in 2003 |
Not
authorised for cultivation |
None –
adventitious presence only |
France &
Greece |
Notes:
* all these GM traits also
approved for use as processed products in food
** information provided by the company concerned
ha = hectares |