Not the law itself: Notice

Address https://gelex.eu/eli/EU/notice/oj/C/2021/23/07@2019-03-13/en

Contents

1. Preamble
2. A.
3. B.
4. C.
5. D.
6. E.
7. F.
8. G.
9. H.
10. I.
11. J.
12. K.
13. L.
14. M.

The European Parliament,

having regard to the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of or produced from genetically modified maize 4114 (DP-ØØ4114-3), pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council (D060242/03,

having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed, and in particular Articles 7(3) and 19(3) thereof,

having regard to the vote of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, on 14 January 2019, at which no opinion was delivered,

having regard to Articles 11 and 13 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers,

having regard to the opinion adopted by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) on 19 April 2018, published on 24 May 2018 and amended on 5 July 2018,

having regard to its previous resolutions objecting to the authorisation of genetically modified organisms,

having regard to the motion for a resolution of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety,

having regard to Rule 106(2) and (3) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas, on 27 November 2014, Pioneer Overseas Corporation, on behalf of Pioneer Hi-Bred International Inc., established in the United States of America, submitted to the national competent authority of the Netherlands an application, in accordance with Articles 5 and 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (the application), for the placing on the market of foods, food ingredients and feed containing, consisting of or produced from genetically modified (GM) maize 4114, and the application also covered the placing on the market of products containing or consisting of GM maize 4114 for uses other than food and feed, with the exception of cultivation;

B.

whereas, on 19 April 2018, EFSA adopted a favourable opinion in relation to the application;

C.

whereas GM maize 4114 was developed to express three insecticidal proteins (Cry1F, Cry34Ab1and Cry35Ab1) for protection against specific lepidopteran and coleopteran pests, and the PAT protein conferring tolerance to the herbicidal active ingredient glufosinate-ammonium;

D.

whereas application of the complementary herbicides, in this case glufosinate, is part of regular agricultural practice in the cultivation of herbicide-resistant plants, and it can therefore be expected that they will be exposed to both higher and repeated doses, which will not only lead to a higher burden of residues in the harvest, and therefore in the imported product, but may also influence the composition of the GM plant and its agronomic characteristics;

E.

whereas the use of glufosinate has not been permitted in the Union since 1 August 2018, as it has been classified as toxic to reproduction and thus falls under the cut-off criteria set out in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

F.

whereas information on residue levels of herbicides and their metabolites is essential for a thorough risk assessment of herbicide-tolerant GM plants; whereas residues from spraying with herbicides are considered outside the remit of the EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (EFSA GMO Panel); whereas the impact of spraying GM maize with herbicides has not been assessed;

G.

whereas, as part of the coordinated multiannual control programme of the Union for 2019, 2020 and 2021, Member States are not obliged to measure glufosinate residues on any maize imports in order to ensure compliance with maximum residue levels (MRLs); whereas it cannot be guaranteed that glufosinate residues on GM maize 4114 will comply with Union MRLs;

H.

whereas GM maize 4114 expresses three Bt toxins (the Cry1F, Cry34Ab1 and Cry35Ab1 proteins) which confer protection against certain lepidopteran pests and coleopteran pests;

I.

whereas although Cry1 proteins have been recognised as having adjuvant properties, meaning that they may reinforce the allergenic properties of other foodstuffs, this was not analysed by EFSA; whereas that is problematic because Bt toxins may be mixed with allergens in food and feed such as soybeans;

J.

whereas a 2017 scientific study on the possible health impacts of Bt toxins and residues from spraying with complementary herbicides concludes that specific attention should be paid to the herbicide residues and their interaction with Bt toxins; whereas this was not investigated by EFSA;

K.

whereas the vote on 14 January 2019 of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 delivered no opinion, meaning that the authorisation was not supported by a qualified majority of Member States;

L.

whereas, both in the explanatory memorandum of its legislative proposal presented on 22 April 2015 amending Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 as regards the possibility for the Member States to restrict or prohibit the use of genetically modified food and feed on their territory and in the explanatory memorandum of the legislative proposal presented on 14 February 2017 amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2011, the Commission deplored the fact that, since the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, authorisation decisions have been adopted by the Commission without the support of the opinion of the Member States’ committee and that the return of the dossier to the Commission for final decision, which is very much the exception for the procedure as a whole, has become the norm for decision-making on genetically modified food and feed authorisations; whereas that practice has, on several occasions, been deplored by President Juncker as not being democratic;

M.

whereas, on 28 October 2015, Parliament rejected at first reading the legislative proposal of 22 April 2015 amending Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 and called on the Commission to withdraw it and submit a new one;

Considers that the draft Commission implementing decision exceeds the implementing powers provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003; Considers that the draft Commission implementing decision is not consistent with Union law, in that it is not compatible with the aim of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, which is, in accordance with the general principles laid down in Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council, to provide the basis for ensuring a high level of protection of human life and health, animal health and welfare, and environmental and consumer interests, in relation to genetically modified food and feed, while ensuring the effective functioning of the internal market; Calls on the Commission to withdraw its draft implementing decision; Calls on the Commission not to authorise the import, for food or feed uses, of any GM plants which have been made tolerant to a herbicide that is not authorised for use in the Union, in this case glufosinate; Calls on the Commission not to authorise any herbicide-tolerant GM plants without a full assessment of the residues from spraying with complementary herbicides, metabolites and commercial formulations as applied in the countries of cultivation; Calls on the Commission to fully integrate the risk assessment of the application of complementary herbicides and their residues into the risk assessment of herbicide-tolerant GM plants, regardless of whether the GM plant concerned is to be cultivated in the Union or is for import into the Union for food and feed uses; Reiterates its commitment to advancing work on the Commission proposal amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2011; calls on the Council to move forward with its work in relation to that Commission proposal as a matter of urgency; Calls on the Commission to suspend any implementing decision regarding applications for authorisation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) until the authorisation procedure has been revised in such a way as to address the shortcomings of the current procedure, which has proven inadequate; Calls on the Commission to withdraw proposals for GMO authorisations if no opinion is delivered by the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, whether for cultivation or for food and feed uses; Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

Versions

1. 2019-03-13