United Kingdom
July 11, 2011
In August 2009, BCPC urged the then Agriculture Minister Hilary Benn to challenge Brussels on its GM EU-wide GM legislation, which was disadvantaging European food production – especially since GM crops had been given safety approval by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).
Since then, the EU Commission has been seeking a compromise, to allow the cultivation of GM crops, but permitting individual Member States to ban GM crops. In a BCPC response to a Defra consultation in September 2010, we opposed this in principle, since it would allow member states to opt out of a science-based product approval system solely on political grounds. However, we reluctantly conceded that it might at least provide a way forward for those Member States which did wish to grow GM crops.
On 5 July, the European Parliament voted to allow member states to restrict or ban the cultivation of GM crops on their territory. They could cite environmental grounds, such as a lack of data on potential negative consequences for the environment, or socio-economic considerations. These include practicality and cost of measures to avoid an unintentional presence of GMOs in other products. Furthermore, the EU Parliament is requesting member states to prevent “contamination” of conventional or organic crops by GM crops – and to ensure that those responsible for such incidents would be financially liable.
The original concept of the EU was to provide a common market. The removal of trade barriers, and harmonised regulations, would provide a level playing field within the EU and allow the EU to compete effectively against the highly effective trading coalitions in North and South America and the Far East.
But the EU Parliament has increasingly driven legislation from political motivations, rather than a desire to improve the EU’s competitiveness and so improve its economic welfare.
Nowhere has this been more evident than in the field of agriculture – where sound science has been increasingly ignored. BCPC had previously opposed the Parliament’s decision to introduce hazard-based cut-offs instead of science-based risk-assessment for pesticides. The net result will be removal of valuable agrochemicals on which farmers rely, especially those growing minor (horticultural) crops – and that without health or environmental benefit.
These actions by MEPs mean that the EU will again put itself at a competitive disadvantage to the rest of the world at a time where population increase, dietary trends and climate change all combine to put increasing demands on food production.
Topics
Species
