I thank the committee for the invitation to appear before it today to discuss the European Commission proposal. This proposal is for a Council decision concerning the provisional prohibition in Greece of the marketing of seeds of maize hybrids with the genetic modification MON 810 inscribed in the common catalogue of varieties of agricultural plant species, pursuant to Directive 2002/53/EC.
I am accompanied by Dr. Tom McLoughlin from the EPA, Dr. Pat O'Mahony from the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, Mr. John Downey, assistant principal officer in the Department of Agriculture and Food and Dr. Barry O'Reilly, an agricultural inspector. My colleagues from the Food Safety Authority of Ireland and the EPA have been invited here today to deal with environmental or health queries of the committee on the GM seed variety MON 810 which is the subject of this proposal.
Ireland's position on GMOs was officially set out in the report of the interdepartmental group on modern biotechnology, which was published by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment in October 2000. This report recommended that, "Ireland's general stance at EU level and at international fora should be positive but precautionary". This position was based on the undoubted potential that biotechnology offers in the fields of medicine, health, agriculture and other areas while, at the same time, recognising that caution must be exercised to ensure food safety and the environment are protected.
Coupled with this position is the comprehensive GM legislation, which has been adopted by the European Parliament and Council in the past four years under the co-decision procedure. This new legislation, which is binding on all member states, governs the assessment and approval procedures for GM crops, food and feed and ensures that the highest standards are in place to protect the citizens of the Community from a food safety and environmental safety aspect. New legislation on labelling and traceability for all GM food and feed, which came into force last year, ensures consumers can continue to have choice and full confidence in the food supply chain. The establishment of the European Food Safety Authority, EFSA, in 2002 has provided further safeguards in that it provides the citizens of the European Union with an independent scientific body with responsibility for the assessment, advice and communication of any risk associated with GMs and all matters relating to food safety.
While GM legislation is binding in all member states, subsidiarity is permitted in regard to coexistence between GM crops and non-GM crops. Applications to cultivate or market a GM product within the European Union are evaluated under strict authorisation procedures backed up by legislation and the independent scientific expertise of EFSA. Each application submitted is evaluated on a case by case basis. If an application for first time cultivation of a GM crop within the European Union is made in Ireland then the evaluation is dealt with by the EPA and the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government under the detailed authorisation procedures, involving all member states and the EFSA. Likewise, applications for approval to market foods containing GM product are dealt with under an equally strict set of procedures operated in Ireland by the FSAI and the Department of Health and Children.
The Department of Agriculture and Food is the competent authority in Ireland for GM legislation relating to seeds, the coexistence of GM and non-GM crops and animal feed. When the Department is assessing a GM application that comes within its remit its initial approach is to establish there are no health or environmental concerns relating to the proposal. Once that has been confirmed by the relevant authorities. the Department takes a decision on the proposal in line with the recommended Irish position. I have outlined the above by way of general background and context.
I refer specifically to the proposal before the committee. In simple terms the proposal refers to the Commission seeking the authority of the Council to stop the Greek authorities from prohibiting the cultivation of GM crops containing the approved GM MON 810 in their country. The proposal had initially been considered at the standing committee on seeds and plant propagating material where a qualified majority for or against the proposal was not achieved. The proposal was then submitted to Council and was on the agenda for last weeks Council of Agriculture Ministers, where again a qualified majority for or against the proposal was not achieved. Ireland abstained at the meeting and the proposal reverts back to the Commission for a decision.
I propose to give the committee background information specific to the proposal and explain the basis for the decision taken by Council. There is within the EU seed sector a mechanism whereby seeds of all agricultural plants intended for marketing within the Union must be listed on the common catalogue of approved plant varieties as provided for in EU Directive 2002/53/EC. The common catalogue compiles seed varieties which have fulfilled certain criteria in stability, distinctiveness, usefulness as well as environment and health safety. The catalogue comprises approximately 30,000 plant varieties. Seed of varieties listed in the common catalogue can be cultivated and marketed throughout the entire Union.
In September 2004 the first GM varieties were added to the common catalogue. A total of 17 varieties of maize which were modified with MON 810. The specific genetic modification relates to resistance to certain lepidopteran insect pests such as the larvae of the European corn borer. The impact of adding the GM varieties to the common catalogue was that, for the first time, certain GM crops could be cultivated anywhere within the European Union. Heretofore, these varieties could only be cultivated and marketed in Spain and France because they had been included in the national catalogues of those countries a number of years earlier. Under Article 18 of the aforementioned EU Directive 2002/53/EC, a derogation is provided in that a member state may, upon application to the Commission, prohibit the marketing of the seed or propagating material of a GM variety included in the EU common catalogue if it is established that its cultivation could be harmful from a plant health aspect or present a risk to the environment or human health.
In April 2005, the Greek authorities notified the Commission that they had introduced a national ban, for the growing seasons of 2005 and 2006, prohibiting the cultivation of these GM MON 810 maize varieties in their country in accordance with Article 18 of Directive 2002/53/EC. While the Greek authorities originally cited scientific reasons for the introduction of the ban they subsequently stated at the standing committee meeting that the absence of coexistence measures in their country and the economic effect cultivation of GM crops would have on their rural areas as the main reasons they were imposing the ban.
The Commission responded by stating that: genetically modified varieties are only accepted for inclusion in the common catalogue after a full assessment has been carried out to determine any potential risks for human health and the environment of genetically modified organisms; EU legislation determines that, other than in cases where EU approved derogations are granted, all varieties listed in the common catalogue are permitted to be cultivated within the European Union, subject to whatever coexistence measures may be in place locally; Greece did not supply information supporting its ban which could have been referred to EFSA for a risk assessment as regards human health or the environment of these genetically modified varieties; and, following a request from the Commission for clarification on the possible effects of the marketing of the above mentioned seeds on the rural environment, the Greek authorities replied that the adverse effects caused to the rural environment by the seeds of those 17 genetically modified varieties are of an economic nature and do not concern the environment in general or human health. The Greek response also accepted that MON 810 has been assessed as safe for the environment and human health. Consequently, the Commission took the view that the specific provisions of Article 18 of Directive 2002/53/EC were not applicable in this case and an authorisation for a prohibition should not be granted.
The Minister for Agriculture and Food, when determining her position on this proposal, established that the seed variety GM maize MON 810 had been assessed as being safe from an environment and health point of view and had been approved for cultivation within the European Union. This position was confirmed by the Departments of Health and Children and the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Having satisfied herself on these issues, the Minister then considered the proposal in the context of the coexistence of GM crops alongside non-GM crops.
While the EU legislation on GMOs is binding on all member states, subsidiarity is permitted in the context of coexistence between GM crops and non-GM crops. Member states are allowed to draw up their own coexistence rules on the basis of Commission guidelines. Coexistence refers to the ability of farmers to choose between conventional, organic and GM crop production, in compliance with the relevant legislation on labelling rules for GM food and feed and/or purity standards. According to the Commission, none of these different types of agriculture should be excluded in the European Union. However the possibility of adventitious presence of GM crops in non-GM crops cannot be dismissed, and can result in economic implications for the farmers whose crops are affected. Consequently, suitable measures during cultivation, harvest, transport, storage, and processing are necessary to ensure proper co-existence. Creating conditions for coexistence means to make it possible for conventional and organic farmers to keep the adventitious presence of GMOs in their crops below the labelling thresholds established in Community law, while ensuring farmers who want to grow authorised GM crops have a reasonable opportunity to do so. It should also be noted that coexistence is not about environmental or health risks. Such risks are addressed by Community legislation, mainly by Directive 2001/18/EC on the deliberate release of GMOs into the environment, and by Regulation No.1829/2003 on GM food and feed. According to the procedure laid down in Community legislation, the authorisation to release GMOs into the environment is subject to a comprehensive health and environmental risk assessment. Since only GM crops that have been found safe for the environment and for human health in the authorisation procedure can be cultivated in the European Union, coexistence does not concern environmental or health risks. Dr. McLoughlin and Dr. O'Mahony will answer any specific questions the committee may have on environmental and health issues related to GM MON 810.
The main issues to be addressed in the context of coexistence are the potential economic impact of the admixture of GM and non-GM crops, the identification and implementation of workable management measures to minimise admixture and arrangements for dealing with situations where adventitious contamination with GM crops might take place.
In 2004 the Minister for Agriculture and Food established an interdepartmental group, which comprised of representatives of the Department of Agriculture and Food, the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Teagasc and the EPA, to examine these issues and draw up rules for coexistence arrangements in Ireland. The group has recently submitted its report and recommendations to the Minister. The Minister will publish the report shortly and will invite observations on the recommendations in the report.
In drawing up the recommendations in the report the interdepartmental group took on board the full range of factors surrounding the GM issue: the principles laid down in the Commission guidelines on GM coexistence; government policy on GMOs; scientific issues; new developments in GM technology; the Irish crop production system and farm infrastructure; and liability. The group recommended that a combination of mandatory and voluntary measures were best to meet the objective of implementing coexistence, that mandatory measures be given legal status and that the voluntary measures would be specified in a code of good farming practice. My colleague, Dr. Barry O'Reilly who was a member of the group, as were Mr. John Downey and Dr. Tom McLoughlin, can provide further details on the specific mandatory and voluntary measures recommended by the working group.
The recommendations also include the establishment of a fund to compensate for economic loss as a result of GM cultivation should this be necessary. It is recommended that this fund would initially be established by the State on a cost recovery basis and be administered by an independent body. It is also recommended that additional research, particularly in relation to GM oilseed rape, be undertaken. In adopting her position at last week's Agriculture Council meeting on this proposal which is the subject of scrutiny today, the Minister was satisfied that there were no safety implications in this case, either from a human health or environment viewpoint. However, she considered it appropriate that GM cultivation should take place in a manner that is guided by agreed coexistence measures in each member state. Given that Greece did not have coexistence measures in place, it was considered that its position in relation to non-approval of the product was not unjustified in the circumstances and for this reason, Ireland believed it would be reasonable to avoid forcing the issue at this time.
I hope I have outlined for the committee the general GMO context in which this proposal was considered; the specific details of the proposal and the rationale behind the position taken by the Minister at last week's Council meeting.