Brussels, 08/02/2006 (Agence Europe) - The interim report from the WTO GMO panel on the transatlantic disagreement on GMOs was sent to the European Commission on Tuesday evening. Because of leaks from the Press, its content, although supposed to be confidential, has been known for some time - at least with regard to the first lessons to be drawn from the 1050 pages examined by Commission experts.
This preliminary report results from the complaint lodged in May 2003 by the United States, Canada and Argentina about the failure of the EU to respect legislation governing the marketing of GMOs - that there was a de facto moratorium between 1998 and 2004 on all new authorisations, resulting from the safeguard clauses invoked by six Member States or the “wait-and-see” attitude of the Commission, whom the plaintiffs reproach for doing nothing to put an end to the situation (see EUROPE 9125)
The WTO would seem to have judged that the de facto moratorium on GMOs between October 1998 and August 2003 in the EU was against multilateral trade rules and constituted an obstacle to trade.
The safeguard measures to which France, Austria, Germany, Luxemburg, Italy and Greece had recourse for protection against GMOs claiming risks to the environment, could not be justified scientifically. Is this a defeat for the EU? Certainly not! “This interim report is largely of historical interest, as the panel will not alter the system or framework within which the EU takes decisions on GMOs,” said Peter Power, spokesman for Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson in a press release on Wednesday. That was the only official comment from the Commission. EU officials have taken a similarly relaxed attitude to the judgment. There is no need to hurry because the verdict is not clear cut, it gives only retrospective criticisms and has still to be confirmed (in April).
The panel recognises that delays because of authorisation procedures constitute a de facto moratorium, but this refers to the past. Marketing authorisations have been available since May 2004, when the EU's new strengthened regulatory framework came into effect (nine new GMOs have been approved since then under security standards stricter than those of the United States) and quantities of GMOs imported into the EU are increasing.
“There is nothing to oblige us to amend our current regulatory framework. the United States and the other parties have stated clearly that they were not challenging the regulatory framework but past practices. The EU's right to set its own GMO import and export rules has not been called into question,” said an EU official on Wednesday, certain that that is the main thing. He also considered that the WTO preliminary verdict would not interfere in any way with the EU's decision-making process which will in any case lead the Commission to reconsider the validity of the safeguard clauses retained by some Member States, in the light of scientific opinions from EFSA (European Food Safety Authority). These opinions, expected for mid-February, will allow the Commission to act, probably at the end of the month.
Deputy US Trade representative Susan Schwab said that the United States expected of the EU a change of behaviour leading to an increase in European imports (se other article).
Friends of the Earth Europe, an environmentalist NGO, has expressed consternation that the EU's approach, guided by the precautionary principle on genetically modified foods and crops, should be considered a “violation of trade rules”. It calls on the EU to take the world lead in working to implement a new international system which, unlike at the WTO, places safety guarantees of human health and the environment above trade rules. “Europe should fight this decision and lead the calls for a new global trading system that protects people and the environment from the worst excesses of industry. The WTO undermines democracy and puts business interests before the welfare of the public. It should not be allowed to rule on what we eat or what our farmers grow,” said Alexandra Wandel, trade coordinator in Brussels.
European Parliament: Greens protest
The same indignation was voiced by the Greens/EFA group and the European Parliament, which takes the view that the interim report of the WTO panel deals "a blow to democracy, by forcing not just the EU but also- perhaps more significantly- the developing countries to give up on any objections to GM crops".
In view of Caroline Lucas, a UK Green and member of the committee on the environment of the European Parliament, this verdict is an assault on the citizens and the political decision-makers who remain concerned by the sanitary, environmental and social impact of GMOs. "By taking position against the EU, the dispute regulation panel is forcing us to open up our market- which means the shelves of our greengrocers' shops- to imports of GMO from the United States. But, perhaps, worse still, it has established that free trade must have priority over the principle of precaution and the democratic right to legislate to protect health and the environment", she protested. She went on to criticise "the deliberate attempt on the part of the United States and the agro-food industry to get compensations out of the EU and to send a serious warning to any developing country which may be tempted to take an anti-GMO stance".