Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-24-Speech-4-134"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021024.6.4-134"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, the questions are very important in the context of the current debate on GMOs in Europe. We still do not have a clear-cut reply to some of Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf's questions. Please accept that my answers are to some extent preliminary ones, which will require further scrutiny and reflection, both within the Commission and in our ongoing discussions with the Member States and the different stakeholders.
The Committee on Agriculture has been informed twice about the status of this proposal. Commissioner Byrne has written to inform Mrs Jackson that the text will be formally submitted to the European Parliament, which will then have the opportunity to scrutinise it.
Article 21(2) of Directive 18/2001/EC provides for the possibility of establishing thresholds below which traces of authorised GMOs are exempted from labelling requirements. Hence, conventional products containing adventitious traces of such GM seeds below this threshold would not have to be labelled.
Let me now answer some of the questions raised by Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf. On the competent body to set thresholds, the Regulatory Committee, provided for in Directive 18/2001/EC, is competent for decisions pertaining to thresholds under Article 21(2) of the directive, with regard to exemption from labelling requirements. However, it is not competent for decisions made under the sector-specific seeds directives, where thresholds relate specifically to marketing criteria for seeds. The Standing Committee on Seeds rightly has the necessary competence in this case. Consistency between the different pieces of legislation has to be maintained.
On the risks that a significant percentage of GM seeds may be released out of control into the environment, I would first say that it is paramount that any threshold should take account of the protection of human health and, importantly, in the case of seeds, the environment. You will be aware that this includes a comprehensive free-market assessment of the potential risks.
Secondly, thresholds must be workable and enforceable. The proposed thresholds arise directly from the opinion of the Scientific Committee on Plants and are scientifically founded with reference to the characteristics of the crop species.
Thirdly, on the registration of GMO cultivation, under the provisions of Article 31(3)(b), Member States are required to establish registers for recording the location of GM fields grown for commercial purposes. As detailed in the article, the objective of this is to allow the possible effects of these GMOs on the environment to be monitored.
As for the scope of Directive 18/2001/EC, this clearly relates to cultivation of a GM seed product itself and not a conventional seed product containing traces of GM seeds.
The GM seed product itself has to be labelled as such and also traced, so that growers will know what they are sowing. It will therefore be possible for Member States to record the locations of the resultant crops.
However, the threshold values, which are based on robust scientific assessment, should aim at ensuring that the cultivation of conventional seeds basically maintains the characteristics of non-GM cultivation.
Coexistence is a key issue in the Commission communication on Life Sciences and Biotechnology – a Strategy for the Future. The Commission has commissioned a number of studies on this issue. The main aim is to assess the consequences arising from an increase in the cultivation of GM crops in the European Union in the context of coexistence. So far, we only have preliminary data based on hypothetical scenarios, and further experimental data is required to provide a more accurate picture.
I wish to begin with a short description of the problem we are faced with when dealing with the adventitious presence of GM seeds in conventional products. This is also important for everyone who has followed this debate.
The Commission is actively pursuing such work before considering possible options to ensure the viability of conventional and organic farming and their sustainable coexistence with GM crops.
As a further step in this process, the Commission has commenced discussions in partnership with Member States, farmers and other private operators to find the most appropriate solutions. It is important to say that the issue of coexistence is not one of risk
. It does, however, highlight a possible need to establish correct agricultural management systems and practices for the different crop types to ensure their coexistence and consumer choice.
This is my initial reply to your questions and I will be happy to make further comments at the end of the debate.
On a global scale, GMO cultivation has increased dramatically in recent years. In 2001, 5.5 million farmers in 13 countries grew an estimated 52.6 million acres with GM crops. Between 2000 and 2001, the number of acres planted to GM crops increased by almost 20%. For some crops, the increase was particularly large. In the US, GM corn increased from 4.4% of all planted acres in 1996 to 32% in 2002. GM soya beans increased from 7.4% in 1996 to 74% in 2002.
To date, the cultivation of GMOs has been geographically concentrated, with 99% of all GM crops produced by four nations: the United States of America, Argentina, Canada and China. However, GM cultivation is likely to spread to other nations in the next few years. So far Europe has played a very marginal role, with fewer than 20 000 acres of GM crops, mainly in Spain and France. That is some 0.03% of the worldwide area.
Europe has large volumes of trade with major GM producers – although trade in GM products has mainly concerned products for animal feed. Imports of GM products for human consumption, like maize, have largely ceased, because of the inability of exporters to ensure the identity of all individual GMOs in shipments.
The last few years have shown that the adventitious presence of traces of GMOs in conventional products has become inevitable. Cross-pollination between plants is a natural phenomenon – that also happens between other seeds. We simply cannot completely control its mechanisms, which include factors such as wind and insect movements. It is therefore largely unavoidable that small traces of GMOs will be transferred to conventional crops and their harvested products.
Storage and transportation practices may also make it difficult or extremely costly to ensure total segregation. Consequently, conventional seed lots will contain traces of GM seeds.
Setting tolerance thresholds for impurities for GM seeds in this particular case is the only way to address the problem. Closing our market completely is not a viable option.
Against this background, the Commission is currently preparing a proposal for a Commission directive amending the annexes to the seed directives. This proposal includes additional conditions and requirements concerning the adventitious presence of GM seeds in lots of non-GM seeds."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples