The European Parliament (EP) on 7 February approved the EU Commission's draft regulation on the use of new genetic engineering techniques (NGT) in crops by a majority with numerous amendments. For example, MEPs argued in favour of labelling products containing genetically modified plants. Among the EU member states, however, there was once again no qualified majority in favour of a common position at a meeting of their permanent representatives. This opens the possibility that the planned NGT regulation can no longer be passed before the European elections in June, writes the NGO Informationdienst Gentechnik in a detailed analysis of the current situation. [GMW update: We caution that there are reportedly attempts in motion to push through the regulation at warp speed.] Informationdienst Gentechnik writes that in contrast to the Commission's proposal, Parliament included a labelling requirement for all genetically modified plants in the text of the regulation by 317 votes to 302 at the request of the Social Democrats and Greens. This means that not only the seeds of NGT plants in privileged category 1 must be labelled, but also the plants themselves and products containing or consisting of NGT 1 plants. "New genomic techniques" should then appear on the label. Informationdienst Gentechnik via GMWatch

 

 

Last week the Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER) of the Member States of the European Union met to try to reach a Council agreement on the proposal to deregulate GMOs/new genomic techniques (NGTs), on the basis of a compromise text from the Belgian Presidency. COREPER did not reach any agreement, which undermines the possibility of starting negotiations with Parliament and the Commission (so-called trilogue) before the European elections in June 2024. Farmer group European Coordination Via Campesina (ECVC) said it welcomes the opposition of EU Member States to this proposal, which doesn't hold up to scrutiny: "The Commission’s refusal to authorise States to ban the cultivation of NGTs in their territories, and the open door to the privatisation of all seeds by patents, denounced by ECVC since the beginning of this process, are the main blocking points. This is a victory for peasants’ organisations, which call on Member States to continue to defend the rights of farmers and consumers by opposing this unacceptable proposal." ECVC via GMWatch

 

 

People seeing claims about a GMO high-anthocyanin purple tomato that can supposedly beat cancer may be surprised to learn such claims have been made for about the last decade and a half — and have been debunked by the UK's National Health Service and Cancer Research UK, among others. And an NPR article on the GMO tomato, after indulging in the obligatory hype, describes conventionally bred anthocyanin-rich purple tomatoes that have been available for years. Jim Myers, the plant breeder responsible for the Indigo family of purple tomatoes, says there are now more than 50 cultivars of the Indigos being grown and bred throughout the world. "There's just all this diversity in the Indigo market class that has come about through conventional breeding," he says. "With the GMO tomato, it's taken them all this time and more to get one variety out there." There's some history about the GM purple tomato here. GMWatch on X @GMWatch

 

 

Argentine president Milei's bill calling for Argentina to join UPOV91 (the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants) was defeated in Parliament. Now he wants to stop farmers from freely saving seeds via another method - local regulations or a new seed law – reports La Nación. There's more about UPOV91 here. GRAIN on X @GRAIN_org

 

 

Eleven bacteria, 22 yeasts, one endophytic fungus (living symbiotically inside plants), and one micro-alga are either in the pre-commercialisation phase or, in the case of a minority, already on the EU market. These 35 micro-organisms identified by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) are They have been genetically modified with new genetic modification techniques. The main tool used is the CRISPR/Cas protein complex, in 33 out of 35 cases. At a time when companies are increasingly lobbying the European Commission to deregulate their genetically modified microorganisms (GMMs), in the same way as the Commission is proposing for plants, this horizon scanning was requested from EFSA by the European Commission. It is a mandatory step if such deregulation is to be proposed. Inf'OGM

 

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!