WRITTEN QUESTION E-1489/00 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Acceptability of the production and sale of fast-growing giant salmon for human consumption.
Date: 2000-05-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU control, environmental protection, fish farming, food safety, foodstuffs legislation, hormone, human nutrition, marketing, public health, transgenic animal

18.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 113 E/17

On 3 December 1998, the Justice and Home Affairs Council adopted an action plan to implement the new
provisions of Title IV of the EC Treaty (1) which was later endorsed by the Vienna European Council. In this
action plan, combatting illegal immigration has been identified as one of the priority measures in the field
of immigration policy.

The special European Council meeting, held in Tampere (Finland) on 15 and 16 October 1999, adopted
far-reaching conclusions on the way in which the future Union immigration and asylum policy should be
shaped. It underlined the need to develop a comprehensive approach to migration addressing political,
human rights and development issues in countries and regions of origin and transit. In this connection,
reference was made to the action plans prepared by the high level working group on migration and
asylum which target the situation in a number of third countries and could be considered a first step in the
development of such a policy. The European Council also expressed support for the management of
migration flows at all their stages and called for the development, in close co-operation with countries of
origin and transit, of information campaigns on the actual possibilities for legal migration, and for the
prevention of all forms of smuggling and trafficking in human beings. To this end, it invited the Council
and Member States to tackle at its source illegal immigration, especially by combating those who engage in
trafficking of human beings and economic exploitation of migrants, to adopt legislation to this end,
foreseeing severe sanctions against this serious crime, to direct, together with Europol, the efforts to
detecting and dismantling the organised criminal networks involved, to secure the rights of the victims of
trafficking in persons with special emphasis on women and children, to assist the countries of origin and
of transit in order to help the authorities of those countries to strengthen their ability to combat effectively
trafficking in human beings and to cope with their readmission obligations towards the Union and the
Member States, and to promote closer co-operation and mutual technical assistance between the Member
States(cid:146) border control services, such as exchange programmes and technology transfers, especially on
maritime borders, and for the rapid inclusion of the applicant States in this co-operation.

The Commission is already working on the proposals and actions needed to give full satisfaction to the
mentioned objectives of Tampere conclusions, as foreseen in the scoreboard to review progress on the
creation of an area of (cid:145)Freedom, security and justice(cid:146), as communicated to the Council and Parliament (2).
As a consequence of the tragic events in Dover, the Community institutions and the Member States should
commit themselves to ensure that all the relevant actions foreseen in the scoreboard are taken and the
measures put in place within the deadlines fixed. The Commission services are also considering the
possibility of taking new initiatives in order to prevent that similar events happen again.

The Tampere European Council also stressed that, as a consequence of the integration of the Schengen
acquis into the Union, the candidate countries must accept in full that acquis and further measures
building upon it when acceding to the Union.

(1) OJ C 19, 23.1.1999.
(2) COM(2000) 167 final.

(2001/C 113 E/016)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1489/00

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(11 May 2000)

Subject: Acceptability of the production and sale of fast-growing giant salmon for human consumption

1.
On 20 April 2000 the Dutch newspaper (cid:145)Trouw(cid:146) reported that the American firm (cid:145)AF Protein(cid:146) has
been working for years on using genetically manipulated hormones to produce salmon that grow ten times
as fast and to five times the weight of the natural species and that these salmon are the first transgenic
animals intended for human consumption. Is the Commission familiar with this development?

C 113 E/18

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2001

2.

Is the Commission aware that AF Protein intends to market these salmon from the end of 2000?

3.
Does the Commission agree with the experts quoted in the above newspaper article that other firms
abandoned such plans five years ago, that fish are already the fastest growing species, that problems similar
to those in intensive pig and poultry farming may arise, that there is no need to breed larger fish, that the
vast majority of consumers feel no need of products of this kind, that there is a lot of opposition in
Scotland to this method of breeding salmon and that it amounts to nothing more than an attempt to
eliminate the competition with poorer quality but cheaper products?

4.
Does the Commission agree with me that the existence of fish of this kind is undesirable just on the
grounds of protecting the natural environment against newcomers with unknown characteristics, not only
because they may escape if they are bred in waters that communicate directly with seas, lakes or rivers, as
in the United States, and as a result of human error or sabotage, and that they should therefore be
prohibited, not least under the GMO directive 90/220 (1)?

On what grounds can the firm concerned have come to the conclusion that such fish are allowed on

5.
the European consumer market under current European and/or national legislation?

6.

How does the Commission intend to prevent this product from going on sale?

(1) OJ L 117, 8.5.1990, p. 15.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(28 July 2000)

1.
The Commission is aware there are several press articles dealing with genetically modified salmon.
Apparently the development of fast growing salmon has reached a state where commercial use appears
feasible.

2.
For human consumption, such fish and the products derived from them would be subject to
Regulation (EC) No 258/97 of the Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 1997 concerning novel
foods and novel food ingredients (1). This fish would require a full assessment that takes at least several
months. As an application has not yet been submitted such fish would not be authorised this year.

The Commission knows that some years ago several organisations and companies in Europe

3.
expressed strong views against using genetic engineering in fish breeding.

The problems of protecting the natural environment mentioned by the Honourable Member are not

4.
related to novel food.

Council Directive 90/220/EEC of 23 April 1990, on the deliberate release into the environment of
genetically modified organisms covers both experimental and commercial releases of genetically modified
organisms and could include possible releases of genetically engineered salmon modified to express growth
hormone. Applications for such releases require, as a pre-requisite, an assessment of risks to human health
and the environment, and are considered on a case-by-case basis. An authorisation is only granted on the
basis that there is no reason to believe that the release will have an adverse effect on human health or the
environment under the conditions of consent.

To date, there have been no applications for commercial releases of genetically modified salmon under
Directive 90/220/EEC and no consents for such have been granted. Similarly, the Commission has received
no summary notifications from Member States with respect
to experimental releases of genetically
modified salmon under the Directive.

18.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 113 E/19

All foods and food ingredients that consist of or contain genetically modified organisms, as well as
5.
foodstuffs derived from them which no longer contain genetically modified organisms, are subject to the
novel food regulation unless they have been on the market in the Community to a significant degree
before it entered into force. This regulation allows the placing on the market of a novel food only after
authorisation has been granted.

If an application is made, a decision concerning the marketing of such fish will be taken in the light

6.
of the relevant legislation, in particular the novel food regulation.

(1) OJ L 43, 14.2.1997.

(2001/C 113 E/017)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1498/00

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(12 May 2000)

Subject: Animal tests on genetically modified crops

Undertakings placing genetically modified seed or genetically modified plants or products thereof on the
market have to demonstrate that they are not harmful. One probable way of doing this is to carry out
animal feeding tests. These experiments are also carried out in the course of basic research.

On the one hand it has not been established how far their results may be read across to human beings,
and on the other it is likely that such tests may cause pain, suffering and injury to the animals. One such
test has been reported in the United Kingdom in which rats were fed genetically modified potatoes. The
rats suffered damage to their brains, spleens, stomach walls, kidneys and immune systems (dpa report of
8.3.1999).

1.

How many animal feeding tests have been carried out in the European Union since 1995?

2.

On what animal species were these tests carried out?

3.

How many animals were used in total (broken down by species)?

4. What genetically modified crops, seeds or derived products were fed to what species?

5. What were the results of the animal tests?

6. What conclusions were drawn from these tests?

Is the Commission aware of cases other than the UK case mentioned above in which animals suffered

7.
substantial pain, suffering and injury?

8.

Are there EU and national laws requiring such animal feeding tests?

(a)

If so, what laws?

(b)

If not, are there plans for any such laws?