EU regions reject the proposed EU regulation on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) because it insufficiently addresses the revision of the GMO authorisation procedure. Mark Weinmeister's (EPP/DE) opinion on "the decision-making process on genetically modified food and feed", which calls for opt-out measures for Member States, will be up for adoption at the European Committee of the Regions Plenary Session later this month.
Weinmeister, the Hesse Secretary of State for European Affairs, was clearly disappointed with the European Commission proposals: "I am surprised that the promise of a review has yielded only a proposal on the use of genetically modified food and feed, as opposed to a radical revision of the authorisation procedure as had been indicated before. For the moment, the Commission tends not to take on board any social considerations expressed by some Member States during the authorisation procedure and its decisions are solely based on EFSA risk assessment. This needs to be changed."
Weinmeister believes that the Commission should be allowed to issue positive decisions on authorising GMO products only based on qualified majority votes in favour both in the Standing Committee or the Appeal Committee, which is not the case now. "Non-authorisation is a matter of great public interest, also the non-scientific concerns should be taken into account in the decision making process" – advocates the Hesse politician.
The opinion finds it unsatisfactory Member States willing to prohibit GMO products entail unreasonably high hurdles to overcome before being able to impose a ban. Weinmeister is critical towards the Commission's proposal for the multitude of conditions to be met in such cases. "Current experience suggests it is impossible to cost-effectively monitor a national ban in view of the free circulation of goods in the internal market and of global goods flows, not to mention the multiple links in the process chains of industrial food and feed production. We do not agree with Commission's proposal for a regulation and consequently call for it to be rejected"
The opinion also calls for a single risk assessment system, better examination of the environmental concerns during authorisation procedures and changing the weighting of votes in the two committees referred to above.