EU divisions pave way for new GMO grain approval

-A +A

European Union ministers were divided on Tuesday (11 February) over whether to allow a new strain of genetically modified maize to be grown on EU soil, handing responsibility for the decision to the European Commission, the EU executive.

Nineteen states opposed approval of the insect-resistant maize, known as Pioneer 1507, developed jointly by DuPont and Dow Chemical, while five supported it and four abstained from any view, EU officials said.

Countries made their positions known in a public debate, but stopped short of a formal vote.

Under the EU weighted voting system, the level of opposition is not enough for a clear rejection, leaving the decision in the hands of the Commission.

Technically, a failure by member states to decide paves the way for automatic approval by the Commission.

If approved, Pioneer 1507 would end Monsanto's monopoly in Europe's small market for GMO crops.

The European Union has only ever approved two other GMO crops for commercial cultivation, a maize type and a potato and the potato was later blocked by a court.

GM crops are widely grown in the Americas and parts of Asia.

However, in Europe, consumer opposition is strong and environmentalists cite scientific research that has highlighted the impact of a toxin released by 1507 on butterflies and moths.

Of the most prominent member states, France has been vehemently opposed to the new GM maize, while Britain has backed it, arguing that Britain risked becoming "the museum of world farming". Germany announced last week it would abstain.

European health commissioner Tonio Borg said extensive research had shown the crop was safe.

Positions: 

European Commission Agriculture Spokesperson Roger Waite said: "The Commission shall adopt the proposal to approve the GMO. The rules are clear - there is no choice. This is why the Commissioner made clear that an abstention is equivalent to a vote in favour. There is no possibility for the Commission to withdraw the proposal because the discussion within Council is already considered that it is acting, whether or not there was a vote.

"There is no timeline. The regulation says the Commission must adopt 'without undue delay'. I have seen press reports stating that the Commission will adopt it tomorrow. This is not true. There are various consultations which need to take place – also taking account of all EFSA opinions," he added.

Advertising

Comments

Ott's picture

Finally, the ice is moving. The ban was absurd. The objection to GMOs and nuclear power are the two worst things the green movement has been wrong about. Epic failure, based solely on unfounded fears.

Brian's picture

I oppose it. And so does the majority of EU countries. But, who cares? And they are surprised about "populism" and "demagogery". Great way of campaigning for May 25th, keep it up!

Kathleen Garnett's picture

I'm not convinced of the need for these GMO products given that the EU has never really had a problem producing enough maize and potatoes under current conditions and for our current needs. The suggestion that they are "insect" resistant seems flimsy at best. When reading about North American mono-agriculture and factory-like farming techniques it is hardly a model any country, let alone continent, should aspire to copy.

Joel Segerstav's picture

Outrageous, and lack of ethic is what that is, any such product shall be tested in a closed ecosystem before made for public use, this because they shall be able guarantee it has no secondary per generation impact of the genome whit negative effect on health, fertility and or fecundity. Any approval of a product whit altered genome that has not been subjugated to extended testing is what i believe a possible threat to the public, because they are the ones being the subjects for this "testing" and therefor not guaranteed if and or not there will be consequences, which should be in place for such approval before it is even considered safe.

Roy Taylor's picture

The random injection of the new genes does not allow them to be inserted, but only introduced. Very often developed from bacteria, alien to any plant genes, they can alter the functioning of the plants genes in unknown ways.The bacteria in gmsoya is a way of forming a poison to any insect biting the plant, but it is also a poison for us when we eat the produce.The herbicide resistance introduced also,is capable of also being present in the crop we eat, with unknown long term consequences, for humans.The use of glysophate herbicides has now been identified as introducing an anti-biotic into our gut, and so killing our good bacteria.There is no peer reviewed science proving their safety.

Earth's picture

This amounts to a declaration of war against the people of Europe, and as such should be met with war-like resistance, if this cannot be undone through peaceful means! Allowing GMO foods to enter the human food chain completely ignores the will of the people, and therefore we, the people, should rise up to protect both the sovereignty of our individual nations, our democratic rights, our human right to determine what we eat - and to fight the rise of corporate control of the foodchain!!!

Any effort necessary to protect the future of our children, and the future of agriculture should be considered to destroy these most evil sociopaths and the corporations they run! Any means necessary should be considered justifiable to protect the people from being poisoned by Brussels!

Vicar's picture

I am the (tonio)Borg. Your crops will be assimilated. Any resistance is futile.