The European Commission is considering a new regulatory framework for GMOs. The deregulation policy option is causing concern among various organisations (distributors, consumers, farmers, environmental protection organisations) and is finding less and less support among EU Member States. Next to criticism of its policy plan, the Commission faces criticism on the methodology it has used. A complaint against the European Commission from two NGOs in February 2023 has led to the opening of an inquiry by the European Ombudsman. The Ombudsman asks the European Commission to reply to concerns raised by the NGOs by 24 July 2023. The concerns relate to the representation of stakeholders in the consultations organised by the European Commission, the taking into account of different scientific opinions, including on the environmental risks of new GMOs, and transparency. The Ombudsman asks the Commission:
* how it has ensured “the study and the ongoing impact assessment process included a comprehensive analysis of existing research on NGTs [new genomic techniques or new GMOs], distinguishing stakeholder opinions from empirical scientific research”
* how it has assessed the “reliability of declarations, especially those coming from the private sector, regarding products in development that rely on NGTs”
* how it has ensured "the transparency of consultation activities carried out by the contractor mentioned by the complainant”. The Commission had mandated the private consultancy firm Technopolis to collect the opinions of certain European stakeholders. Inf'OGM

 

 

How does the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which "should be an independent scientific source of advice, information and risk communication", apply the principles of transparency and independence enshrined in the European regulation establishing it? At the request of the European Parliament’s Environment Committee, a report on EFSA, published in April 2023, was produced by three law professors from the University of Maastricht (Netherlands). Overall, the report positively assesses EFSA’s policies of transparency and independence. However, issues requiring improvement are identified. For example, the definition of conflict of interest, as set out in the 2017 EFSA independence policy, is too narrow because it does not explicitly include potential conflicts, political pressure and national interests. Also, there is a lack of transparency in the granting of waivers for experts with a conflict of interest. EFSA granted waivers in more than half of the conflict of interests cases identified between 2018 and 2022. In addition, the report expresses concern over the "revolving doors" practice. Despite recommendations from the European Ombudsman, the EU Court of Auditors, and the European Parliament, EFSA has not adopted measures to prohibit senior staff from taking up specific positions after their term of office, nor procedures to restrict access to confidential information when a staff member moves to another job. The report also points to shortcomings in the declaration by academic experts of the financial relationships between their university employers and their university employers’ industry partners. Inf'OGM

 

 

Valerie Segrest is a Native foods nutritionist and the Regional Director of Native Food and Knowledge Systems for the Native American Agriculture Fund. In an in-depth interview, she expresses her outrage that a corporation – GM salmon firm AquaBounty – "now owns the DNA of wild Chinook salmon. Someone now owns my ancestral foods’ DNA. I remember that as a spirit-shaking moment and thinking, 'How dare you?' We put so much into taking care of the Chinook, and a company, without consultation, ripped out the genetics of a Chinook salmon and spliced it with an Atlantic salmon and an eel fish — three species that, if you combined in a small tank and let swim together for thousands of years, would never procreate. And that is why it is called the Frankenfish. Mother Nature designed them not to be this one fish, so why are we wasting so much scientific brilliance on this weird Planet of the Apes kind of stuff?" She adds, "The first goal and the work of colonisation, the genocidal efforts and policies that have been put in place to wipe tribes off the lands we originate from, is to promote invisibility. They made us invisible and created a false narrative about an entire race of people. AquaBounty followed that narrative. They never asked permission to take our cultural, intellectual property." Ecotrust

 

 

In the wake of the coronation of King Charles III, we're happy to remind readers that you can buy Bertram Verhaag's heartwarming and multi-award-winning film about Charles's commitment to organic farming, The Farmer and His Prince (Der Bauer und Sein Prinz). Made at a time when he was still Prince Charles, the film focuses on the longstanding collaboration between the prince and his farm manager David Wilson. The DVD includes German and English versions of the film. We wholeheartedly recommend this film, which cannot be bought in the UK but which is fortunately still available in the EU at the link above. We're aware that Charles, who in the past has been outspoken about the dangers of GM technology, nevertheless recently signed into law the appalling Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Bill in the UK, which removes regulatory safeguards from a subclass of GMOs. This has led to some understandable disappointment and concern, though it's hard to know what else he could have done without precipitating a constitutional crisis that would likely spell the end of the British monarchy – a decision with ramifications far beyond his own individual fate. Verhaag's film, some might conclude, shows where his heart and mind reside. GMWatch comment on film sold by Denkmal

 

 

The Canadian agriculture minister has approved the adoption of gene-edited seeds without any regulation, health or safety assessments, traceability or liability and only voluntary disclosure. Countries that have deregulated gene-edited seeds include the US, Japan, Australia, Argentina and Brazil, as noted by an article from National Newswatch Canada. The article indicates that the New Zealand Government has been in closed door talks to “progress allowing GE [gene-edited] seeds to be imported and sold in New Zealand, the UK and the European Union”. Claire Bleakley, president of GE Free NZ, said, “GE Free NZ has written to the Minister to clarify if this statement is correct. If this is true, the Government has breached its 'duty of care' and opened up dangerous economic and safety issues that GE regulation protects, through these secret talks.” GE Free NZ says the government's move is a direct threat to New Zealand exporters who sell their products as non-GMO. GE Free NZ

 

We hope you’ve enjoyed this newsletter, which is made possible by readers’ donations. Please support our work with a one-off or regular donation. Thank you!