Luxembourg, 12/06/2014 (Agence Europe) - On Thursday 12 June, a decisive step was made towards allowing EU member states to decide for themselves whether or not they want to cultivate genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
The environment ministers of the 28 EU member states have reached a political agreement on the July 2010 proposal for a regulation aiming to amend EU legislation (Directive 2001/18/EC) to allow member states to restrict or prohibit the cultivation in their territory of GMOs that have been authorised at EU level (see EUROPE 11098). This would be under very strict conditions and for reasons other than environmental or health considerations. The ministers' agreement was a foregone conclusion as, at the end of May, the ambassadors had already approved the bitterly negotiated compromise on the text (see EUROPE 11090).
Nevertheless, there was general satisfaction on Thursday. The Greek Presidency was congratulated and the Danish Presidency was also thanked as it had not been recognised for its efforts in 2011. As predicted, it was only Belgium and Luxembourg that abstained.
“For the first time, the member states will have the possibility to restrict or prohibit unilaterally the cultivation of GMOs on their territory. There has been an appropriate balance between the competences of the EU and national competences in respect of subsidiarity. For the first time, the member states will be able to depend on a solid legal basis according to their specific situation and to adopt national measures. This is the first step of a long process to be continued with the new European Parliament”, said Greece's Minister for the Environment, Energy and Climate Change Yiannis Maniatis at the end of the Council he chaied. He added: “This is an important contribution for the protection of the environment and for the freedom of the member states. This means that the Commission doesn't need to improve the [legislative] framework further.”
European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Policy Tonio Borg was delighted. “Nobody voted against. The member states will be able to limit or restrict cultivation for legitimate reasons other than health or environmental considerations, even if there is Commission authorisation for cultivation - based on the scientific opinion of the European Food Safety Agency. If EFSA and the Commission say 'no', this will not be for everyone. If it is 'yes', this will not be a 'yes' for everyone. The member states will be able to prohibit or limit cultivation without preventing the free movement of GMOs. This will resolve the issue of subsidiarity and the legal issues that have been encountered in the past when some countries had unilaterally adopted safeguard measures that were duly annulled”, he said (our translation).
Under this political agreement, the petitioning business will be able to exclude certain countries from the scope of application of the authorisation requested of the European Commission, and member states will similarly be able to request to be excluded from the geographical scope of the authorisation. If the business accepts this geographical exclusion, the authorisation will then be granted only for the countries that have not objected. If the business refuses to adjust the geographical scope of the authorisation, the countries that want to prohibit or limit cultivation on all or part of their territory will be able to make use of their right of opt-out, giving duly listed reasons from an open list in its legislation. In all cases, the Commission will serve as an intermediary and facilitator between the petitioning business and the member states. The reasons that can be given are: - environmental policy objections, land use and town planning, socio-economic impact, the need to avoid GMOs in other products, agricultural policy objectives, and public policy reasons. The European decision to approve or reject the authorisation will be taken by qualified majority in comitology. In the absence of qualified majority, the Commission will be able to adopt the decision.
Until up to six months after the entry into force of this revised Directive 2001/18/EC, a member state will be able to request, via the Commission, to adjust the geographical scope of an authorisation granted under Directive 2001/18/EC or Regulation 1829/2003 before the date of entry into force of this legislation. A review of the future directive is planned for no later than four years after its entry into force. The Commission has taken the commitment to transcribe into European law the EFSA guidelines for risk assessment. Work on this is under way.
During the debate, the Italian minister, Gianluca Galletti, gave assurances that his country (which will soon assume the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU) “will make every effort to close the file by the end of the year”. Luxembourg's minister, Carole Dieschbourg, explained her country's abstention as being due to the fact that GMO companies are stakeholders in the process, and due to “concern with regard to the relationship of strength between the member states with reduced staff and companies, and due to the fear that this legislation may lead to a wave of authorisations”. A statement was given for the minutes of the session. The French minister, Ségolène Royal, spoke of her “full support for the text”. In her opinion, “it's a very good thing to apply the principle of subsidiarity and to eliminate the risk of non-proportionality because GMOs are already prohibited on our territory. This directive clarifies the procedure and the means that the member states will be able to use, and it offers greater flexibility of action and greater legal security”. However, “France expects much from the Commission for it to transform the EFSA guidelines into a binding text”. Furthermore, “the legislation would merit being strengthened as concerns the co-existence [between conventional/biological crops and GMO crops] at border level”, said Royal, who is counting on the European Parliament during the second reading of the text. The Polish minister, Tomasz Husak, and the Slovenian representative, Metka Ipavic, expressed the same concern.
In the opinion of Greenpeace, the negotiated text “is riddled with legal holes”. Marco Contiero, the Greenpeace EU agriculture policy director, says: “Environment ministers want to give member states the right to ban GMO cultivation on their land, but the text they agreed today does not deliver on what it promises. It would still leave those countries that want to say 'no' to GMOs exposed to legal attacks of the biotech industry”. (AN)