Articles

Statement by European Commissioner for Trade Karel De Gucht on TTIP

European Parliament Plenary debate (Strasbourg, 15 July 2014)

(.....) Let me focus on three themes that have been on the forefront of the criticism levied against TTIP: the alleged lack of transparency, the alleged risk of lowering of regulatory standards which underpin our way of life and ISDS. Many people have alleged that the negotiations have been conducted so far in secrecy. It is true that when I meet with my counterpart Ambassador Froman, we prefer to do it without TV cameras being present. If you want to build confidence you also need a certain degree of confidentiality. It is also true that the Commission historically has conducted negotiations without that much media attention. Not because we wanted to keep them secret, but because the interest was much lower. TTIP has completely changed that. The Commission has worked hard to accommodate that new.

(.....) If we agree that the American inspector can stay home and just rely on a copy of the inspection report we have already made, there is no lowering of any standards anywhere. The only thing that is lowered is the amount of red tape. And where the gap in approach between the EU and the US is too wide, we just won't change our rules: we will not import any meat that is treated with hormones; we will not give a blanket approval of imports of GMOs. On the other hand, it is not because the US makes a claim that it must be wrong by definition. We should rely on the opinions of our own scientists in EFSA and not on ideology.

(.....) In addition, I will continue to be fully at your disposal to answer all questions you may have. And I stand ready to consider any other specific ideas on how we can further improve transparency.

---

GMO stands for genetically modified organism and the Global Non-GMO Food Market 2014-2018 research report, available with SandlerResearch.org, forecasts the industry to grow at a CAGR of 15.92 percent over the period of 2013-2018. Complete report spread across 50 pages is available at http://www.sandlerresearch.org/global-non-gmo-food-market-2014-2018.html .

For non-GMO food products, scientists remove one or more genes from the DNA of an organism, such as a bacterium, virus, or animal, and recombine them into the DNA of the plant they want to alter or make genetic changes in the DNA of the crops. As a result, crops become intolerant to most of the herbicides and pesticides and even to some of the crop diseases. However, such modification in the genes of the crops and foods has resulted many health and environmental risks. As a result, more consumers in the US, Japan, Europe, Canada, and other nations are demanding non-GMO foods as it is better for their health and has lower environmental risks.

The report covers the present scenario and the growth prospects of the Global Non-GMO Food market for the period 2013-2018. To calculate the market size, the report takes into account revenue generated from retail sales of non-GMO food products.

The Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA), a Pan African platform comprising civil society networks and farmer organisations working towards food sovereignty in Africa, has today lodged an urgent appeal to the African Regional Intellectual Property Organisation (ARIPO), African Union and United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) to urgently revise the draft ARIPO Plant Variety Protection Protocol, recognise farmers’ rights and facilitate the right to food. AFSA is requesting that such revision be based on a broader consultation process with farmer organisations and experts from outside of the plant breeders’ rights sector.

African civil society organisations, many of them members of AFSA, made submissions to ARIPO on its draft Plant Variety Protection (PVP) law and policies in November 2012. AFSA has itself submitted comments on ARIPO’s Response to Civil Society: Draft Legal Framework for Plant Variety Protection, March 2014. In both submissions, several serious concerns were raised about the law, which later was titled “the draft ARIPO Plant Variety Protection Protocol”, being based on UPOV 1991 (the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants), a restrictive and inflexible legal regime focused solely on promoting and protecting the rights of commercial breeders that develop genetically uniform seeds/plant varieties suited to mechanised large-scale mono-cropping agriculture systems. Of particular concern, is that the draft ARIPO PVP Protocol renders the centuries-old African farmers’ practices of freely using, exchanging and selling seeds/propagating material illegal and undermines the right to food.

Transgenes - moving without control

http://www.stop-the-spread-of-transgenes.org/

...

EFSA gives carte blanche to the uncontrolled spread of Monsanto's genetically engineered oilseed rape

German government urged to take action to stop the flow of transgenes into the environment

26 June 2014. In a letter addressed to the German government, ten organisations are warning 

that genetically modified rapeseed could spread uncontrollably throughout the EU. The letter 

voices concern about a current European Food Safety Authority EFSA opinion, which argues 

in favour of an EU import approval for Monsanto's rapeseed MON88302. The glyphosate­

resistant plant is to be imported in the form of viable seeds and, in Europe, will only be 

processed into feed. The plants have shown unexpected side effects due to a genetic 

modification that causes the plants to flower earlier than their natural counterparts. In its 

opinion, EFSA confirms that "the occurrence of feral GMHT [genetically modified herbicide­

tolerant] oilseed rape plants are likely to occur wherever GMHT oilseed rape is transported." 

Even so, the authority sees no problems for agriculture and the environment.

Research

Republished study: long-term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize

Gilles-Eric Séralini1*, Emilie Clair1, Robin Mesnage1, Steeve Gress1, Nicolas Defarge1, Manuela Malatesta2, Didier Hennequin3 and Joël Spiroux de Vendômois1

Environmental Sciences Europe 2014, 26:14 doi:10.1186/s12302-014-0014-5

The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://www.enveurope.com/content/26/1/14

The results of a recent U.N. Food and Agriculture (FAO) survey on genetically modified crops in international trade, reveals that trace amounts of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are being detected with increasing regularity. The survey, conducted between February 2013 to June 2013, collected responses from 75 country officials. Participants were asked questions relating to internal GMO crop production, how GMO crops were labeled, and whether countries had domestic capacities to detect GMO crops. Because there is no international agreement or consensus for what qualifies as “low level,” as it relates to GMO crop presence, the survey notes, “the data may not perfectly correspond to the actual events monitored elsewhere.” Among the 75 FAO member countries that participated in the survey, there is a variety of GMO monitoring protocols.

As demand increases for non-GMO ingredients, manufacturers have to turn to suppliers they can trust. New products made with non-genetically modified organism (non-GMO) ingredients are on the rise in the United States. (.....) But, it can be hard for manufacturers to be sure that they’re actually getting non-GMO ingredients. However, there are some things they can ask their suppliers to make sure they’re getting the right ingredients, including:

- Can you track non-GMO ingredients back to the seed, the grower and the field?

- If your corn is “identity preserved,” what property is being “identity preserved”?

- How do you segregate non-GMO corn from GMO corn?

- What programs do you have in place to guarantee non-GMO status?

- How do you control your non-GMO supply chain with contract partners?

- Does an independent third party certify your non-GMO products? What are the standards used for certification? Do they match those of the Non-GMO Project?

Ingredion, global provider of ingredient solutions, is among the companies working hard to offer non-GMO products.

(Candy Industry)

---

Let us celebrate today the latest initiatives of our nation's growing food safety movement. Across the country, consumers are demanding the right to know what is in their food, and labeling of genetically engineered food. It's a vibrant and diverse coalition: mothers and grandmothers, health libertarians, progressives, foodies, environmentalists, main street conservatives and supporters of free-market economics. Last year, a New York Times poll found that a near-unanimous 93 percent of Americans support such labeling.

(Huffington Post)

Cargill is introducing a soybean oil made from identity-preserved (IdP), conventionally-bred (non-GM) soybeans for customers interested in exploring a non-GMO claim on their product label. The oil is refined in Cargill's Des Moines, Iowa, plant in a process certified by SGS, a global inspection, verification, testing and certification company. "Despite the many merits of biotechnology, consumer interest in food and beverage products made from non-GM ingredients is growing, creating opportunities and challenges for food manufacturers and food service operators," said Ethan Theis, food ingredients commercial manager, Cargill. Supplies of Cargill's new oil are limited, and one food manufacturer already has purchased a significant portion of the available supply. According to Theis, producing an IdP soybean oil from non-GM soybeans is an intricate process, from procuring a dedicated supply of non-GM soybeans to developing processes to avoid co-mingling with bioengineered crops during harvesting, transportation, storage, handling, processing and refining.

---

Does Cargill support mandatory labeling legislation for foods containing GM ingredients?

(.....) Rather than mandatory labeling of GM foods produced, in whole or in part, from or with biotechnology, Cargill supports the voluntary labeling of conventionally-grown products for consumers who are seeking non-GM foods.

A planned EU/US trade deal should sweep away "non-scientific barriers" to US sales of many genetically modified crops and some chemically treated meats in Europe, the US agriculture secretary said on Tuesday (17 June). The two sides aim to create the world's largest free-trade pact, whose advocates say it could boost their economies by $100 billion (€74bn) a year each. But after a year of talks on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), agriculture is emerging as one of the most difficult areas. The European Union has ruled out importing meat from animals injected with hormones and said that it will not simply open the door to GM crops.

ENVIRONMENT Minister Nicos Kouyialis yesterday rejected opposition parties’ criticism that the agreement reached by EU ministers on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) opens the door to GM cultivation in Cyprus, and put it down to “misinformation”. On Thursday, the EU Council of Environment Ministers reached a compromise deal on GMOs, giving member states the right to decide whether to allow the cultivation of GMOs in their national territory. Kouyialis, who represented Cyprus at the meeting, welcomed the agreement on the restriction and prohibition of GMO cultivation, noting that after years of intense negotiations “we agreed on the current text, because we want Cyprus to be free of genetically modified organisms”. He clarified that keeping Cyprus a GM-free zone “is a long standing position of this government”.