On Wednesday 7 February, the European Parliament adopted its negotiating position with the Council of the EU on an amended proposal to regulate the use of new genomic techniques (NGTs).
The report by Jessica Polfjärd (EPP, Swedish) on this amended text, which has been referred to the European Parliament’s Environment Committee with a view to further negotiations with the Council of the EU, was adopted by the European Parliament plenary with 307 votes in favour, 263 against and 41 abstentions (see EUROPE 13344/11).
MEPs maintain the general structure of the proposal: NGT plants considered equivalent to conventional plants (category 1), which would be exempt from the requirements of GMO legislation, while other NGT plants (category 2) would have to comply with the rules of Directive 2001/18 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms. All NGT plants must remain banned from organic production.
For NGT 1 plants, MEPs amended the rules on the size and number of modifications required for an NGT plant to be considered equivalent to conventional plants. To ensure transparency, MEPs decided to set up a public online list of all NTG 1 plants. The amendment on mandatory labeling for all NGT products (including those in category 1) was adopted in plenary with 317 votes in favor, 302 against and 13 abstentions. MEPs also want the Commission to present a report on how consumers and producers perceive the new techniques, seven years after they came into force.
For category 2 NGTs, MEPs chose to maintain most of the requirements of the legislation on GMOs, which is one of the strictest in the world, including the authorisation procedure and compulsory labelling of products. Category 2 NGT plants should help to make the agri-food system more sustainable. To encourage their dissemination, MEPs agreed to speed up the risk assessment procedure, but stressed the need to respect the precautionary principle.
MEPs are in favour of a total ban on patents for all NGT plants, plant material, parts thereof, genetic information and process characteristics contained therein, in order to avoid legal uncertainty, increased costs and new dependencies for farmers and breeders. They are also calling for a report to be drawn up by June 2025 on the impact of patents on farmers' and breeders' access to plant reproductive material, and for a legislative proposal to be presented to update EU rules on intellectual property rights accordingly.
This vote in the European Parliament represents “a clear and responsible choice, contrary to the ideology of degrowth advocated by some for nearly five years”, commented Anne Sander (EPP, French).
This green light will make it possible to “select new plant varieties that are more environmentally sustainable, use fewer chemical inputs, are more resistant and better adapted to climate change, while respecting biodiversity and the specific characteristics of Italian and European agriculture”, said the Coldiretti organisation.
Euroseeds welcomed the positive outcome of the vote, which “highlights a growing consensus among policy makers that embracing innovation to support sustainable agriculture is a necessity”. New genomic techniques offer a wide range of solutions, according to Euroseeds, which believes that European farmers can grow healthier produce with higher yields.
A majority of MEPs voted in favour of new GMOs “not being subject to safety controls and liability procedures, which puts nature at risk with the dissemination of untested genetically modified plants in European fields”, expressing the concern of the NGO Friends of the Earth Europe.
Greenpeace had protested outside the European Parliament building to urge it to reject the proposal.
The Belgian Presidency of the Council is unable to obtain a mandate. At the same time, on Wednesday the EU Member States discussed the NGT dossier within the Committee of Permanent Representatives of the Member States to the EU (Coreper). The Belgian Presidency of the Council tried in vain to obtain a negotiating mandate. Many delegations reportedly stressed their support for the Belgian Presidency's desired direction in drafting the text and for the work done to address the patent issue. In addition, some Member States would have stressed the importance and potential of new genomic techniques for the environment, but also for European competitiveness.
However, the compromise text presented by the Belgian Presidency did not receive sufficient support to obtain a qualified majority at this stage. The negotiating mandate has therefore not been approved and the Council cannot start negotiations with the European Parliament for the time being. The Belgian Presidency of the Council will examine in the coming days how to advance work on this dossier. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)