Brussels, 04/02/2014 (Agence Europe) - Is it possible that the Commission proposal to authorise crops of the genetically modified TC 1507 maize in the EU, manufactured by Pioneer Dupont, could, for the first time, face a qualified majority for rejection? Nothing could be less certain. The Greek Presidency will be better able to judge after sounding out the 28 ambassadors to the EU on Wednesday 5 February at the Coreper meeting. It will also be looking at Germany's position on the matter, which has not been clearly stated but which will be decisive. A diplomatic source on Tuesday (see EUROPE 11004), however, asserted that this position “remains the great unknown and it is not certain that Germany will give its opinion on Wednesday. It may wait until the General Affairs Council debate on 11 February”. 12 February is the deadline by which the Council will have decide by qualified majority.
Everything is still up for grabs. This explains the initiative taken on Tuesday 4 February by the Greens/EFA group at the European Parliament to write a letter to Chancellor Angela Merkel and the president of the CSU, Host Seehofer, calling on the German government to vote against this highly controversial proposal.
Abstention from Germany would mean yes. Rebecca Harms (Greens/EFA, Germany) deputy leader of the group stressed that, “until now, the environmental risk of this variety of genetically modified maize has not been removed at all. Up until now, scientific research is even identifying considerable dangers to butterflies and other animals. A majority of European and German citizens do not want this kind of maize in their fields or on their plates. This is why the German government should absolutely vote against its authorisation. An abstention from Germany is the same as saying yes because, without a qualified majority, the Commission can take the authorisation decision itself”.
The European Commission, which called on the Council to provide a follow-up to the European Court of Justice ruling against the delay in the authorisation procedure, has now effectively announced that, if there is no qualified majority for or against this proposal, it would authorise this maize (see EUROPE 10985).
Martin Häusling, the spokesperson for the group's agricultural policy, added that, “from a legal point of view, the European Commission has overstepped its powers”, as the European Parliament had already affirmed (see EUROPE 10998), and it is not possible that the genetically modified 1507 maize by Pioneer, “which, in every part of the plant, produces toxic properties that have not been sufficiently assessed in Europe, can be authorised for cultivation. In addition to this case, the Commission is urged to totally revise its authorisation procedure”.
In 2009, at the regulatory committee responsible, no qualified majority for or against was reached. The proposal obtained 91 votes in favour, 127 against (Austria, Cyprus, Denmark, France, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland and Slovenia), with 95 abstentions (Belgium, Czech Republic, Portugal, Slovakia and the Netherlands).
To obtain a qualified majority today, 260 votes out of 352 would be needed. Germany accounts for 29 of these votes and could tip the balance if it gave its support to the member states opposed to growing this crop. For the time being, the countries that could give their support to the camp opposing the crop are Malta (3 votes which had not been counted up in 2009), Croatia, which at the time, was not a member of the EU (7 votes) and Bulgaria, which previously abstained (10 votes). Our diplomatic source explained that “it will be necessary for the countries that abstained to go over to the no camp in order for a majority against to be obtained”. (AN/transl.fl)