MEPs slam EC’s GMO proposal
The law would have given meat and livestock producers reassurance that their animals had not been fed on fodder contaminated with genetically modified material, if their country opted out of the use of GMO feed.
MEPs from all political groups and a range of countries were concerned the proposal might be unworkable, as it did not include an impact assessment, and that member state measures might not be compatible with the single market or World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules.
However, there was a general feeling that MEPs supported the proposal in principle, but questioned how the proposal was drafted.
“There is a clear majority in the European Parliament against this proposal,” said Environment Committee chair Giovanni La Via (European People’s Party, Italy), whose own report recommended rejecting the draft legislation.
“There is no impact assessment around this draft, and we believe this was not the best proposal possible,” he said.
He suggested the proposal was in conflict with the principles of “better regulation” and transparency. He also raised concerns that the proposal could “fragment” the internal market, leading to border inspections.
His view was backed by Guillaume Balas (Socialist & Democrats Party, France) who called the proposal “vague” and questioned its “practicability”.
Mark Demesmaeker (European Conservatives and Reformists Group, Belgium) voiced concerns about whether the proposal was compatible with the internal market and WTO rules.
Meanwhile, Lynn Boylan (European United Left/Nordic Green Left European Parliamentary Group, Ireland) said the proposal was “dishonest” and offered a false solution to a problem. “I agree that we should reject this half-baked proposal from the European Commission (EC), which is totally flawed.”
The EC was asked to come back with a new proposal, as the issue of GMO feed needs to be tackled.
However, EC representative Ladislav Miko asked the MEPs to reconsider the proposal, as the Commission does not have a plan B.
He dismissed the alleged impact on the single market. “In the past, safety clauses were invoked several times, and this was never considered a problem for the internal market,” he said.
The Environment Committee will vote on the proposal on 12-13 October. The file will then be put to a vote by Parliament as a whole at the 26-29 October plenary session in Strasbourg.
