Policy debate on genetically modified organisms: Environment Council, 9 March

March 10, 2006

Brussels, 9 March 2006

13th Council Meeting - Environment. Brussels, 9 March 2006
Provisional version

The Council held a policy debate on genetically modified organisms (GMOs), allowing discussions, which started in December 2006, to continue in a more in-depth manner regarding European perspectives on the future use of GMOs.

The orientation debate focused in particular on issues relating with risk management and authorisation procedures.

The delegations were in favour of greater transparency of the procedures as well as of a more complete and adequate information for the consumers.

Reference was also made to the need for coordination between all bodies concerned in particular between the Commission, the European Food Safety Authority and the competent national organisations. Scientific research should be intensified in this context so as GMO evaluation may take in greater consideration of possible long-term consequences of the use of those products.

Delegations welcomed the organisation in April of two conferences on coexistence between organic, traditional and genetically modified cultures and on the applicability of the precautionary principle in this field. They expect that the two conferences as well as the assessments reports concerning the application of the new Community legislation announced by the Commission might be the basis to continue the current debate on the next session of the (Environment) Council in June.

EU Council
News release 6762/06 (Presse 58)

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

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
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

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