The debate on new genetic engineering in the European Union is entering the next round. Following the Commission and the majority of MEPs in the European Parliament, EU member states in the Council of the European Union are now also calling for the deregulation of new genetic engineering. This means the start of “trilogue negotiations” between the Commission, member states, and the European Parliament. However, many issues remain unresolved.
Lack of traceability
Contrary to the current legal framework, 94% of all seed varieties produced using new genetic engineering technologies will no longer be subject to approval procedures in the future, including risk analysis and environmental impact assessment procedures. And that is not all: If the Commission gets its way, it will not even be possible to retroactively revoke approval for many NGT products if problems arise. At the urging of the Greens, a majority of MEPs in the European Parliament have called for approval to be revoked if problems arise. However, it is still unclear whether this position will be maintained in the trilogue negotiations.
Patents
Although the Commission now wants to treat many products derived from new genetic engineering technologies in the same way as those derived from conventional breeding, it will still be possible to apply for patents for genetically engineered products. It is still completely unclear how it will be verified whether characteristics have been achieved through genetic manipulation or conventional breeding. This could quickly lead to major legal difficulties for large and small breeders alike. The EU Parliament has stated in its position that plants derived from new genetic engineering should not be patentable. However, patents are not an EU competence and instead are granted by the European Patent Office. In order to exclude NGTs from patentability, all 38 signatory states to the European Patent Convention would have to agree.
New genetic engineering in organic farming
The Commission proposes that organic farming should remain the only sector free of genetic engineering. To this end, GMO seeds are to be labeled. However, the key questions of how contamination along the production chain can be avoided, and how organic farmers can ensure GMO-free production under these conditions, remain unanswered. The majority of members of the European Parliament have spoken out against mandatory coexistence measures such as cultivation distances, mandatory registration, etc. The member states in the European Council, on the other hand, do want member states to be able to take measures to prevent the unintended presence of genetically modified plants in organic farming on their territory.
Opt-out
According to the European Commission, once approval or registration has been granted, it should apply throughout the EU. EU member states would then no longer be able to ban the cultivation of these NGT plants. This is a particularly bitter blow for Austria, whose GMO-free organic and conventional agriculture is an international export success. The majority of Members of the European Parliament want a drop-out option for member states. This would mean that Austria could remain GMO-free. Individual ÖVP members of parliament, including Alexander Bernhuber, did not vote on this point, while the NEOS voted against an opt-out. Member states want an opt-out for only a few NGT plants.
Negotiations will show how the deregulation of new genetic engineering technologies will proceed. However, one thing is clear for us: technofixes will not solve the problem. Only an agricultural transition to climate- and biodiversity-friendly methods, a focus on regional cycles, and small-scale agriculture can mitigate the consequences of climate catastrophe. With enough public pressure, perhaps even the conservative parties and the European Commission will understand this.