MEPs urge 0.5% threshold for labelling of authorised GMOs (Environment Committee first-reading report adopted)

June 6, 2002

Brussels, 05 June 2002

The Environment Committee has adopted a first-reading report by Karin SCHEELE (PES, D) on the authorisation and labelling of genetically modified food and feed, with a majority of its members backing the view that the Commission's proposed regulation needs be toughened up.

The Commission proposal provides for a threshold above which food or feed accidentally contaminated with non-authorised GMOs must be labelled. However, the committee voted against establishing any threshold for non-authorised GMOs, as this would undermine EU legislation on biosafety. For accidental contamination with authorised GMOs, the committee adopted an amendment reducing the proposed threshold from 1% to 0.5%.

MEPs were also against any revision of the current directive 2001/18/EC after the complicated conciliation procedure that took place last year. It was felt that this new regulation should complement it instead. Lastly, amendments were adopted on the public's right to information and on the participation of national and local authorities in the authorisation procedure.

This draft report, as amended, was adopted by only a small majority, with 28 MEPs in favour, 22 against (mainly EPP-ED members) and two abstentions. It is scheduled for plenary debate under the codecision procedure at the July plenary session in Strasbourg.

04.06.2002 Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer ProtectionIn the chair: Caroline JACKSON (EPP-ED, UK)

Press enquiries:Ton Huyssoon - tel. (32-2) 28 42408e-mail:

European Parliament News Report 2002-06-05 _en.htm

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most Commented

James Fryer illustration (27 July 2017)

It is not Luddism to be cautious about destroying an academic publishing industry that has served us well, says Marilyn Deegan

Jeffrey Beall, associate professor and librarian at the University of Colorado Denver

Creator of controversial predatory journals blacklist says some peers are failing to warn of dangers of disreputable publishers

Hand squeezing stress ball
Working 55 hours per week, the loss of research periods, slashed pensions, increased bureaucracy, tiny budgets and declining standards have finally forced Michael Edwards out
Kayaker and jet skiiers

Nazima Kadir’s social circle reveals a range of alternative careers for would-be scholars, and often with better rewards than academia

hole in ground

‘Drastic action’ required to fix multibillion-pound shortfall in Universities Superannuation Scheme, expert warns