Strasbourg, 24/09/2002 (Agence Europe) - On Tuesday, the European Parliament adopted at first reading (264 in favour, 200 against and 47 abstentions) the report by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) on the proposal of regulation concerning crossborder movements of genetically modified organisms (GMO). The proposal aims to transfer into Community law the provisions of the Cartagena Protocol on prevention of biotechnological risks (adopted on 29 January 2000, it will take effect as soon as it is ratified by fifty countries) and to set in place a framework for international trade of GMO. Divergence between the supporters of the report and its opponents are reflected in the results of the vote and in the debate. The EPP/ED and ELDR Groups expressed serious reservation on several points while the PES, GUE/NGL, Greens/EFA and EDD Groups found it excellent.
Adopting Mr Sjöstedt's report by a narrow margin, the Parliament above all approved the amendments aimed at: (1) respecting the national regulatory framework on GMOs of the importer country; (2) excluding from the scope of the directive certain GMOs (which are used for human medicines and which come under international agreements signed by the Community, and those which are destined to be voluntarily disseminated into the environment but which are considered risk-free for human health in the context of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety); (3) submitting intentional crossborder movements of GMO to prior consent from the importer country by compelling the exporter to obtain written notification from the relevant national authority; (4) guaranteeing the confidentiality of certain information contained in the notification while compulsorily placing other information in the public domain (general description of GMOs, complete details of importers and exporters, place of dissemination, environmental risk assessment, etc.); (5) calling on the Commission and on Member States to elaborate international rules and procedures regarding the liability for and repair of damage caused by crossborder movements of GMO. The Parliament also called on the Community to make its expertise and resources available to LDC and candidate countries to allow them to implement the requirements of the Cartagena Protocol. On the other hand, MEPs rejected (254 against, 245 for and 16 abstentions) an amendment aimed at banning exports of GMO banned from dissemination on the EU territory. On the other hand, they adopted (against the rapporteur's opinion) two amendments of the EPP/ED. One authorises an exporter not to notify the GMOs intended for a third country if they have already been the subject of notification by another exporter or have already received authorisation by the country concerned. The other gives authorisation not to notify GMOs in "confined use" (i.e. which are not intended to be dispersed into the environment) or that are in transit towards their final destination.
During the debate, Mr Sjöstedt welcomed this proposal "whereby the EU will become an example to be followed worldwide". He stressed the many "weak points", mainly regarding the liability of exporters and companies. Environment Commissioner Margot Wallström, for her part, pointed out that the Commission has always sought a balance between the advantages of a new technology and protection of public health. The Commission, she specified, cannot accept the amendments aimed at: (1) developing rules with regards responsibility and repair for damage caused (in her view, "this proposal is not an instrument in environmental matters"); (2) banning the export of GMOs which would be banned from dissemination on EU territory; and (3) making the export of GMOs subject to acceptance by the importing party. On the other hand, she did take a stance in favour of two EPP/ED amendments. Speaking on behalf of the agriculture committee, Emilia Franziska Müller (EPP, Germany) said for her part that certain provisions of the report hinder the trade of GMOs and that the trade in GMOs in a closed environment, such as a laboratory, should be exempted from notification procedure as it does not represent a risk for human health. Speaking for the EPP/ED, Germany national Renate Sommer pointed out that her group rejected the amendment relating to responsibility. On behalf of the Liberals, Belgian Dirk Sterckx felt it is "essential to transpose the protocol into Community law and to make it compulsory". He said they backed the amendments of the EPP/ED "as we are in favour of exemptions and against the idea of asking for information twice". French national Nicole Thomas-Mauro, Non-Attached, said that "while agreeing with the sense of the proposal", the report is the "weak link in a rickety legislation, that we shall abstain from". Speaking on behalf of the PES, Torben Lund, from Denmark, felt on the other hand, that the report was "excellent", mainly because it is "important for developing countries to be protected against the trade of GMOs". Laura Gonzalèz Alvarez (Spain) announced the support of the GUE/NGL Group for the report, because it "introduces stricter control of crossborder movements, well-advised use of the precautionary principle, the notion of responsibility, and gives greater influence to importer countries".
Hiltrud Breyer (Greens-EFA, Germany) welcomed this excellent work, "which dared to go beyond the minimum standards proposed by the Commission. She also used the occasion to ask the Commission to, "remain firm and not go down on its knees to the USA…We should not lift the moratorium on" on trade in GMOs, she stated. Johannes Blokland (Netherlands EDD) stated that he and his colleagues were in complete support of the report.