Call to boost transparency of GMO approval process

Bookmark and Share

By Martha Moss
- 13th January 2011
Efforts must be made to improve transparency and dialogue by all of us

European health commissioner John Dalli

This cancer of conflict of interest must be stopped

ALDE deputy Corinne Lepage

Your interests and the environment's interests are completely protected

Martina Newell-McGloughlin, of the University of California

European health commissioner John Dalli has acknowledged that more needs to be done to improve the transparency of the EU's GMO approval process.

At a debate in the European parliament on Wednesday, Dalli said that biotech companies "needed to continue improving transparency and access to their data".

Stressing the need for a science-based approach, he insisted that the EU had the "world's strictest system of authorising GMOs".

"Efforts must be made to improve transparency and dialogue by all of us," he added.

Dalli spoke of the need to balance business innovation with consumersafety, and called for "a robust system of authorisation that can putthe minds of most of us at peace".

Concerns over a perceived lack of independence within the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the EU agency responsible for carrying out the risk assessment of new GM products, have been a factor in the long-running deadlock over biotech crop approvals in Europe.

The discussion, organised by parliament's ALDE group, brought independent scientists and EFSA officials together to discuss this issue and the risk evaluation process in the EU.

'Conflict of interest'

The Maltese commissioner's comments came as French Liberal MEP Corinne Lepage, called for an end to what she called the "cancer" of conflicts of interest.

France, alongside Germany and several other EU member states havecriticised the commission's opt out plans, which would essentiallyallow EU member states to decide whether to allow GM crop cultivation.

And Lepage, a former French environment minister and parliament's rapporteur on the European commission's proposals to introduce a national opt-out clause for GMO cultivation, said managing conflicts of interest was "an extremely important issue".

"Quite often the links between experts and private interests are a growing concern and the reform of this has become something of great import," said Lepage.

An avowed GM sceptic, she added, "We need to rely on expertise that we are entirely confident in. This cancer of conflict of interest must be stopped."

However, fellow ALDE deputy George Lyon said, "It's vital for farmers and consumers that the current impasse on cultivation sees progress.

"It's not for us as politicians to decide on the science. Decisions on food safety must be based on scientific evidence.

"We cannot keep stalling while the rest of the world is using the new technology, not only to benefit farmers but also the environment."

Guidelines

Angelika Hilbeck, president of the European network of scientists for social and environmental responsibility, called for more clarity in the new EFSA guidelines on evaluating the health and environmental risks of GMOs.

In a "critical appraisal" of the EFSA guidelines, she said new environmental risk assessment regulations were "certainly for the greater good of the European people".

However, she warned that the guidance was "non coherent" in part, and said that while scientific progress had been made on some sections, other parts were narrow in scope.

Setting out the American approval process, Martina Newell-McGloughlin, of the University of California, said, "As tough as the US system is, EFSA's is tougher. Your interests and the environment's interests are completely protected."

However, Gilles-Eric Séralini, the president of the scientific council of the committee of independent research and information on genetic engineering at Caen University was among the panellists calling wanted to see more traceability and transparency on the issue.

Questioning whether low life-expectancy in the US could be "due to GMOs", he claimed that EFSA was failing to fully take the effects of products into account.

He said that Europe was "crucially lacking" independent research, and called for EFSA to be given money to carry out tests independently of private companies.

Karine Lheureux, a senior scientific officer at EFSA's GMO unit, said the 21 experts on the authority's GMO panel provide independent scientific advice, working on a case-by-case basis and taking a comparative approach.

Fellow EFSA scientist Claudia Paoletti said the authority looks "for intended and unintended effects" when making assessments.

"We need to assess the GMO in relation to its intended use and in light of the evaluation of all available scientific evidence," she said.

Bookmark and Share

Have your say...

Please enter your comments below.

Name

Your e-mail address


Listen to audio version

Please type in the letters or numbers shown above (case sensitive)

Related News

EU efforts to improve food safety hailed a 'big success'

Campaigners press for 'fundamental change' at EU food agency

UK deputy calls for 'bonfire' of EU agencies

Former EFSA chairwoman defends 'transparency' of under-fire EU agency

New report brands majority of EU agencies as 'wasteful'



Latest news

MEPs overwhelmingly back resolution on gay rights

Parliament has overwhelmingly adopted a resolution to condemn homophobic laws and discrimination in Europe


MEP calls for health treatment to switch from 'treatment to prevention'

A conference in Brussels heard that 40 per cent of Europeans aged over 15 have a chronic disease


MEPs call for 'tuna sanctuaries' to help preserve stocks

Parliament has adopted new legislation, implementing internationally-agreed rules on bluefin tuna fishing


EU urged to do more to promote missing children hotline


MEPs hit out at attempts to 'water down' code of conduct


Taiwan steps up campaign to become full WHA member


Parliament endorses EU-wide FTT


EU leaders urged to reject 'failed' austerity measures


Article Comments

"The discussion, organised by parliament's ALDE group, brought independent scientists and EFSA officials together..."Is he an 'independent' scientist, he who is commissioned by Greenpeace to rally against GMO authorisations, who gets financing and support from giant chain store Carrefour, from foundations with loaded social and political agendas, from a company selling quack pills and infusions?Is he a 'scientist', he who, without evidence and against all odds and stats, suggests that low life-expectancy in the US O! A modest 78 years at birth could be 'due to GMOs'? Is he a scientist, he whose publications on GMOs have been systematically criticised by regulatory authorities and by scientists, including on points of statistics and toxicology for beginners?He is not. He is an activist.He has every right to be an activist, but it would be so much neater if the critics of EFSA were to apply to themselves what they (wrongly) claim is missing in EFSA.Of course, such a panel of speakers on the anti-GMO and anti-EFSA side is no sign of a cancer of conflicts of interest affecting the ALDE group or indeed the European Parliament.

wackes seppi
15th Jan 2011 at 12:05 am

More from Dods