Recommendation for second reading on the common position for a regulation on genetically modified food and feed

May 29, 2003

Brussels, 28 May 2003

FINAL A5-0202/2003 23 May 2003 Type of Procedure: Codecision procedure (second reading)
RECOMMENDATION FOR SECOND READING on the Council common position for adopting a European Parliament and Council regulation on genetically modified food and feed
Full text

[...] EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

In a number of important respects, the common position agrees with the proposals made by Parliament at first reading.

The principal provisions of the common position are as follows:

Thresholds for adventitious or technically unavoidable contamination

At first reading, the EP opposed the idea of a threshold for unauthorised genetically modified organisms (GMOs) which had received positive scientific risk assessments.

The Council proposes a three-year transitional provision which:

imposes a limit of 0.5%. If necessary, this level may be reduced by means of the committee procedure, particularly for GMOs sold direct to the final consumer.

After the transitional period, the 'zero tolerance' which Parliament called for would apply.

This transitional period was rejected by the committee.

b. Limit values for labelling

At first reading, the EP called for a limit value for labelling of 0.5%, but only for food/feed produced from GMOs. In the case of living GMOs, the EP called for 'zero tolerance'.

The Council has set a limit of 0.9% above which food containing GMO material whose presence is adventitious or technically unavoidable would have to be labelled accordingly. Particularly in the case of food or feed which contains or consists of GMOs (the latter meaning living GMOs), lower limits may be set under the committee procedure.

The amendments from 1st reading have been reinstated and adopted.

c. Coexistence

The principal aim of the proposed labelling of genetically modified food and feed is to ensure that consumers have freedom of choice. The separation of genetically modified food and feed from that which is not GM is a basic precondition for this.

This concern was a central theme at first reading. The relevant amendments, 14, 43 and 88, were adopted by a clear majority. These amendments required operators in future to take the requisite measures to avoid adventitious contamination. Regrettably, the Council and Commission did not take this position into account and therefore these amendments have been reinstated and adopted.

[...]

Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy - Rapporteur: Karin Scheele

Already registered?

Sign in now if you are already registered or a current subscriber. Or subscribe for unrestricted access to our digital editions and iPad and iPhone app.

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

Outreach & Partnerships Officer ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF LONDON
Dean, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE
Academic Director (Primary) ST MARYS UNIVERSITY, TWICKENHAM
Vice-Chancellor MASSEY UNIVERSITY

Most Commented

Elderly woman looking up at sky

A recent paper claims that the quality of researchers declines with age. Five senior scientists consider the data and how they’ve contributed through the years

A keyboard with a 'donate' key

Richard Budd mulls the logic of giving money to your alma mater

Woman tearing up I can't sign

Schools and universities are increasingly looking at how improving personalities can boost social mobility. But in doing so, they may be forced to choose between teaching what is helpful, and what is true, says David Matthews

Eleanor Shakespeare illustration 19 May 2016

Tim Blackman’s vision of higher education for the 21st century is one in which students of varying abilities learn successfully together

Otto illustration (5 May 2016)

Craig Brandist on the proletarianisation of a profession and how it leads to behaviours that could hobble higher education