BRUSSELS (Reuters) - It’s time for Europe to reassess its skepticism towards genetically modified (GMO) foods and trust scientists who have deemed them safe -- or risk more international lawsuits, the EU trade chief said on Thursday.
“Like any new science, biotechnology carries risks and those risks must be properly assessed and managed,” European Union Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson said in prepared remarks.
“This process takes time, and those whose job it is to manage risk are right to be thorough.”
“But it is also reasonable to insist that when the process has run its course, and the scientific issues have been thrashed out, we stand by the science. And that applies to both the technical experts and to the politicians they report to.”
European Union governments have repeatedly clashed over authorizing new GMO products and have not done so since 1998.
However, since 2004, there has been a trickle of new approvals under a legal default process -- rubber stamps by the European Commission, the EU executive -- that kicks in when the bloc’s member states fail to agree after a certain time.
That situation has angered major GMO food exporters such as the United States, which together with Argentina and Canada, challenged EU biotech policy at the World Trade Organisation.
The WTO found that the EU’s effective moratorium on new GMO imports constituted “undue delay” and violated trade rules.
In remarks to representatives of the European biotech industry, Mandelson said EU policies would be watched closely by its trading partners, which were moving ahead with their own GMO policies -- and leaving Europe trailing behind.
“We will inevitably be scrutinized closely. If we fail to implement our own rules, or implement them inconsistently, we can, and probably will, be challenged,” he said.
“We must be under no illusion that Europe’s interests are served by being outside a global market that is steadily working its way through the issues raised by GM food. They are not.”
In EU law, there is little that the Commission can do to persuade the EU’s more GMO-wary national governments to change their position on biotech foods.
However, analysis of recent voting patterns indicates that the consistent “blocking minority” of EU governments may be eroding as several smaller countries opt to abstain rather than reject an application outright -- weakening the “anti-GMO” camp.
Some countries, like Britain, Finland and the Netherlands, almost always vote in favor of approving new GMOs. They are offset by a group of GMO-skeptic states such as Austria, Greece and Luxembourg, which vote against and force a voting stalemate.
Not approving GMO products seen as safe by scientists could also harm Europe’s livestock industry, which depends heavily on imported animal feed -- and much of that was biotech grain-based material from the United States, he said.
“Unless we can close the gap between GMO approvals in the EU and in feed-exporting countries such as the United States, Argentina and Brazil we may have hungry cows and struggling farmers,” Mandelson said.
“Isolation from international trade in agricultural biotech products that have passed credible safety standards simply may not be a viable option for the EU,” he said. “And we have to understand this reality.”
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.