----

(2004/C 78 E/0621)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3555/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 December 2003)

Subject:   Development of artificial viruses and bacteria in America and its impact on biodiversity and biological warfare in Europe

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(22 January 2004)

It is inherent to nature and its evolution that existing plants and animals can be replaced by others, that existing living beings can lose their resistance to diseases (or other stressors), that they may have no resistance to new or imported diseases or threats. Evolutions and variations in the climate, migrations of people, natural disasters, emerging natural (i.e. non man-made) diseases, spontaneous genetic mutations, etc. alter the conditions of competition between species and can result in major shifts such as the complete disappearance of species and changes in the floristic or faunistic composition of environments. One can thus never exclude that uncontrollable changes occur in nature, comparable to the ones listed by the Honourable Member.

However, such changes can not be put on the account of PhiX174. The PhiX174 virus is a bacteriophage and as such, a natural parasite of Escherichia coli. The genetic identity of the virus has long been known. The scientists have not newly created this virus. Its genome has rather been synthesized in vitro and has been re-assembled, which means that the synthesised genome is identical to the natural one. In fact, the resulting virus is indistinguishable from its natural counterpart.

There is nevertheless an urgent need to improve knowledge of connections between, on the one hand, public and animal vulnerability and health, and, on the other, biological diversity, ecosystem dynamics, habitat fragmentation, land use change, climate change and other environmental and social changes and drivers.

This is not the case for PhiX174 or similar experiments. The Commission is aware of the fact that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) could contaminate food, drinking water and the environment, and in this way could become a danger for humans and animals. The handling of these organisms must, therefore, be in compliance with the Community aquis on GMOs, in particular with the directives 2000/54/EC (1), 2001/18/EC (2) and 2000/618/EC (3).

There are no international agreements on biological warfare that provide guarantees that artificial organisms will never deliberately be used to make people ill or exterminate them in an area classified as hostile. The only international Convention on the matter, the Biological and Toxic Weapons Convention, provides for a framework of controls. Progress on its implementation has however stalled. The Commission is not a party to this Convention and does not take part in its meetings.

Moreover, international agreements seek to control the use of GMOs. By nature, they can, however provide no guarantee that GMOs may never be used in a hazardous way.

The Commission is aware of the fact that new bio-technologies require a thorough observation of ongoing developments, and is financing projects on risk assessment of these new technologies.

Access to GMOs should enable the scientists working in Europe to follow up new developments in this area. Imports of these GMOs are, however, tightly controlled and handling is limited to those laboratories that are licensed in compliance with the relevant Community legislation.

No single authority, including the Commission, is in a position to totally exclude or prevent such development. However, complementing the efforts of the individual Member States, the Commission has actively put in to place or is part of a significant number of mechanisms and systems that reduce this risk to the maximum possible extent.

A number of examples can be mentioned here:

----

(1)  Directive 2000/54/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2000 on the protection of workers from risks related to exposure to biological agents at work (seventh individual directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC), OJ L 262, 17.10.2000.

(2)  Directive 2001/18/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC — Commission Declaration, OJ L 106, 17.4.2001.

(3)  Commission Directive 2000/68/E of 23 October 2000 including an active substance (bentazone) in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, OJ L 276, 28.10.2000.

(4)  COM(2003) 320 final.

----