Mr President, when the Cartagena Protocol was adopted a couple of years ago, it constituted major progress both for the European Union and the EU countries. The Protocol is based on the precautionary principle and respects the right of states to have stricter national rules governing the trade in genetically modified products. The Protocol is an important example of the way in which global trade regulations can be based on environmental and consumer protection. It constitutes a positive alternative to parts of the World Trade Organisation’s practice. With the adoption of the proposed law we are now debating, the Cartagena Protocol will become EU law. While existing EU rules would apply to imports, the proposed law would regulate exports from the EU. It is a matter of urgency that the rules be adopted. The number of countries ratifying the Protocol is increasing, so that it will soon be possible for it formally to come into force. By adopting this legislation, the EU can become a positive global example in this area. We in Parliament should like to cooperate closely with the Commission and the Council to ensure that these laws are made ready as swiftly as possible. As rapporteur, I believe that the Commission’s proposed legislation has quite a few weaknesses. In important areas, the proposals do not go as far as the Cartagena Protocol itself, and in other areas the proposals create an unnecessary lack of clarity. I and the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy therefore propose tightening up on a number of points. It must not be possible to export seeds or products not approved for use within the European Union. Only for reasons concerned, for example, with the climate, will it be possible for seeds to be exempted from this rule. We cannot have one set of safety and consumer protection measures for ourselves, and another set for others. In order for products to be approved for export, the importing country must be required expressly to have approved their importation. It must never be possible for a failure to respond to be interpreted as authorisation, as it in actual fact could be under the Commission’s proposed law. That especially applies to countries with limited technical capacity in this area, for it is crucial to ensure that they genuinely recommend the imports and are able to handle them. The actual exporter shall always be responsible for notification. That is important in order to prevent a lack of clarity where the matter of responsibility is concerned. It is also more in line with what is in actual fact prescribed by the Cartagena Protocol. In the continued negotiations within the framework of the Cartagena Protocol, the European Union must support proposals for international regulations explaining companies’ legal responsibilities. The public’s right to information about what is exported must be both clarified and reinforced, at the same time as respect for legitimate company secrets is maintained. EU regulations must also make it unambiguously clear that exports to other countries must always respect the stricter rules which these countries are entitled to introduce, and this in full accordance with the Cartagena Protocol. I therefore hope to see the adoption of as large a proportion as possible of the amendments by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, as well as of the amendments tabled jointly by the Confederal Group of the , the Group of the and the Group of the . I also wish to thank the responsible Commission officials for their very helpful cooperation. I would also thank my colleagues in the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy.

Political group: GUE-NGL