Brussels, 26/05/2003 (Agence Europe) - Agriculture Ministers from EU Member States were again divided on Monday between supporters and adversaries of Community legislation on co-existence of transgenic harvests and other conventional and organic production. They also displayed divergences, which for some of them underpins the entire problem, namely, the lifting of the moratorium on authorising new GMOs. Commissioner Franz Fischler, confirmed that the Commission was going to present "guidelines" in July or to be more exact, a guide on good practices relating to the issue of co-existence, where by the objective was to guarantee farmers the freedom of production and allow for effective cohabitation between different production modes.
During the debate, Spain, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Finland, Sweden and the Netherlands underlined, like the Commission, stressed that Member States should be responsible for setting out their own rules for ensuring co-existence between the different kinds of production. They also appealed for a swift lifting of the moratorium, namely that regulation governing traceability and labelling of foodstuff for animal and human consumption enter into force. These countries consider that the issue of co-existence should be completely separate from the case on the moratorium and pointed to the heavy atmosphere characterising the international situation with complaints made to the WTO by the USA against the EU to get the moratorium lifted. At the opposite end of the spectrum, Austria, Belgium and Portugal asked for the lifting of the moratorium and the setting up of clear and harmonised Community legislation on co-existence, which is the exact opposite of the Commission's approach based on subsidiarity. Not quite as inflexible as these three Member States were France, Greece, Italy, Denmark and Luxembourg, which requested a new assessment over the next few months and if necessary, a new definition of a Community legal framework in the medium or long term. Germany, which is seeking to keep the two dossiers separate, insisted on the need to put in place harmonised legislation at an EU level. It believes that a problem will occur if Member States are expected to treat the problem of co-existence themselves.
According to Mr Fischler, co-existence cannot be justified as an alibi for extending the moratorium"
During a press conference, Mr Fischler explained that co-existence could not be justified for an alibi to extend the moratorium. According to Mr Fischler co-existence had nothing to do with the risks of GMOs to human health, as claimed by some Member States and ecological organisations insofar as it only focuses on cohabitation of two traditional crops with GMO crops that have preliminary authorisation. Mr Fischler explained that the Commission was going to take into account in its recommendations, the differences between crops and the differences of climate in the EU, "if not, in practice, it won't work".