Articles

This is an interesting article about a small but significant farmer shift from GMO to non-GMO crops in the GMO heartland of Iowa.

Taiwan's Food and Drug Administration on Friday dismissed concerns of genetically modified wheat grown in the United States entering Taiwan's market, saying Taiwan bans imports of such wheat.

On 27 February 2015, MEP José Bové asked the European Commission concerning "New biotechnology techniques".

EC laws on genetic engineering are based on the principles of precaution, transparency and traceability. In accordance with the definition laid down in Directive 2001/18/EC, which is based on these principles, new biotechnology techniques must be considered to be techniques which produce GMOs. The (unanimous) conclusions of the Environment Council meeting of December 2008 talk about strengthening the environmental risk assessment in relation to the use of GMOs as a whole. Given the emergence of new biotechnology techniques and the definition of GMOs in Directive 2001/18/EC:

1. Can the Commission confirm that the GMOs resulting from new genetic engineering techniques are covered by Directive 2001/18/EC?

2. Does it intend to exclude some of these techniques from the scope of Directive 2001/18/EC, and if so, why?

3. Will it continue to regulate both the techniques and the resulting products, in accordance with the European legislation in force?

4. Does it plan to propose regulating only the products obtained, irrespective of the technique used?

On 15 April 2015, answered Mr Andriukaitis on behalf of the Commission concerning "New biotechnology techniques".

1. The Commission is carrying out a legal analysis to clarify whether new biotechnology techniques, applicable to plant breeding, are falling under the scope of Directive 2001/18/EC.

2. The decision to include or exclude a technique from the scope of Directive 2001/18/EC depends on the interpretation of the definition of Genetically Modified Organisms and of the conditions for exemption provided for in the directive. This analysis is currently ongoing and results cannot be anticipated yet.

3 and 4. The aim of the legal analysis that the Commission is undertaking is to ensure that the GMO legal framework in force is applied to all products falling within its scope.

March 2015 was an eventful month for the subject of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food. The two tempests stirred up by recent news and all the other issues in this long-running debate look to be headed for some kind of resolution this year – although the two sides are no closer today than they’ve ever been.

An internal document seen by EurActiv discloses Commission plans to give member states the final say on whether or not to accept GMO imports. EurActiv France reports.

This morning 300 peasants organized by La Via Campesina occupied the meeting of the Brazil National Biosafety Technical Commission (CTNBio) in Brasilia, which was convening to discuss the release of three new varieties of transgenic plants in Brazil including a request by FuturaGene to legalize their genetically engineered eucalyptus trees. The CTNBio meeting was interrupted and eventually cancelled.

La Via Campesina | GRAIN | 08 April 2015 | Publications

Seeds are under attack everywhere. Under corporate pressure, laws in many countries increasingly put limitations on what farmers can do with their seeds and with the seeds they buy. Seed saving, a thousand-year-old practice which forms the basis of farming, is fast becoming criminalised. What can we do about this?

(.....)

Finally, perhaps the most important lesson to be learned is that this is a long battle. Our common experience has been that, after the short respite following the defeat of a seed law, business and government return to the fray. And, if they win, they will always ask for more in the future. We must be constantly prepared for another round of resistance and struggle in the defence of our seeds.

This Wednesday 15 April, some key decisions may be taken in the European Commission regarding GMOs. Commission President Juncker had promised to make EU decisions on GMOs more democratic. However, the proposed 'solution' currently on the table will not do anything to that end. What's more, on the same day the Commission intends to authorise up to 17 new GM crops for import as food and feed. All of these are tolerant to one or more herbicides, and/or produce (multiple) insecticides. Take action now to tell Juncker to keep his promise on the GMO authorisation rules, and to urge him to not allow this wave of new GM crops for import.

Friends of the Earth Europe, Greenpeace, IFOAM

Press release - April 8, 2015

Brussels – A new plan by the European Commission to review the way decisions are made on genetically modified (GM) crops could break a promise by its president, Jean-Claude Juncker, to make the EU system more democratic. In a letter released today, environment and food NGOs, and organic farmers warn that the plan, due to be released next week, would mean the Commission could continue to authorise GM crops despite the opposition of a majority of national governments, the European Parliament and public opinion.

In a speech at the European Parliament on 15 July 2014, Juncker pledged that the Commission would reform the GM crop authorisation system. He said that he “would not want the Commission to be able to take a decision when a majority of Member States has not encouraged it to do so”.

However, the plan could allow the Commission to open the EU market to GM crops, including in the context of trade negotiations with the US. US authorities are pressing the Commission to wave through 17 GM crops that are pending approval for import into the EU.

IFOAM EU Group Press release

Brussels, 1 April 2015 – As the Directive granting Member States the right to ban GMO cultivation on their territory enters into force tomorrow, a new report from IFOAM EU provides an overview of existing national “coexistence” measures aimed at preventing contamination by GMOs.

Eric Gall, IFOAM EU Policy Manager, said: “Our legal analysis shows that banning GMOs is the most effective way to prevent GMO contamination and to avoid extra costs for the food industry, public authorities and the organic sector. So-called “coexistence” measures are costly, difficult to design and implement and are not sufficient for the prevention of contamination. The organic food and farming sector therefore calls on all Member States to ban all GMO cultivation on their territories.”

The new IFOAM EU report shows that the Member States with the most developed legal “coexistence” measures have, in most cases, eventually chosen to ban GMO cultivation. On the other hand, measures are clearly insufficient or simply non-existent in many countries.

Alejandro Gill, IFOAM EU Policy Coordinator continued: “The Spanish example clearly shows that GMO cultivation threatens the viability of organic production for farmers in the territories where they are cultivated. It is highly regrettable that, in the case of a Member State refusing to ban GMO cultivation, the new Directive does not require Member States to put contamination prevention measures in place, nor to develop an effective liability regime to compensate victims of contamination.”