WRITTEN QUESTION E-1569/00 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Genetically modified maize.
Date: 2000-05-23
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: environmental protection, environmental risk prevention, genetically modified organism, insecticide, maize, public health

18.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 113 E/29

By increasing competition, the application of the rules relating to state aid is certainly very valuable, in
particular for the small and average-sized Member States, given that it helps create a Community cultural
area without frontiers by combating the fragmentation and compartmentalisation of the film production
market.

4.
In the meantime the Commission has applied the principles set out in its decision on the French
support system for film production to aid schemes in Germany (federal system), Ireland, the Netherlands
and Sweden. During the coming months, the Commission will, in close cooperation with the Member
States in question, apply the same principles to aid schemes in force in Belgium, Germany (the L(cid:228)nder),
Spain, Italy, Luxembourg and the United Kingdom.

(2001/C 113 E/023)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1569/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(23 May 2000)

Subject: Genetically modified maize

One fifth of the maize planted in the US last year was genetically primed to produce a natural insecticide,
the aim being to (cid:145)protect(cid:146) the maize from caterpillars and other insects.

Research carried out by biologists at New York University (Nature, 12/99) shows that the poison is also
found in the maize pollen and in the soil. It remains active for 25 days underground, probably because it
is protected from biodegradation as a result of bonding to soil particles. Because the study was carried out
in a greenhouse, the researchers cannot determine what the effect of the poison is on the total biotope in,
and in the vicinity of, a genuine maize field.

1.
Is the Commission aware of the adverse spill-over effects of the (cid:145)natural(cid:146) poison produced by
genetically modified maize? If so, what action has the Commission taken to prevent these adverse effects?

2. Will the Commission obtain information on, and/or conduct research into, the adverse spill-over
effects of the (cid:145)natural(cid:146) poison produced by genetically modified maize? If not, why not, given the risks to
the total biotope in, and in the vicinity of, maize fields?

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(12 July 2000)

Council Directive 90/220/EEC of 23 April 1990 concerns the deliberate release into the environment of
genetically modified organisms (1) (GMOs). Part B of the Directive sets out the authorisation procedure for
experimental releases of GMOs, and Part C regulates the placing on the market of GMOs.

A consent under both parts of this Directive is only granted after a comprehensive risk assessment has
been carried out to evaluate the risks that the GMO may pose to human health and the environment.

Currently there are two genetically modified maize varieties expressing the Bacillus thuringiensis toxin
conferring insect tolerance that have been given consent for the placing on the market in the Community.
Both varieties underwent a comprehensive environmental risk evaluation before they were given consent
by the Member State, where the application had first been notified. These assessments included the
consultation of independent scientific committees set up by the Commission, with favourable opinions
published in December 1996 and February 1998 and a re-assessment published in September 1999.

C 113 E/30

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2001

Article 16 of Directive 90/220/EC provides for a safeguard clause, which allows Member States to
(cid:145)provisionally restrict or prohibit the use and sale of that product(cid:146) when a Member State (cid:145)has justifiable
reasons to consider that a product which has been properly notified and has received written consent
constitutes a risk to human health or the environment(cid:146). The Commission and the other Member States are
immediately informed of this measure and the reasons for the decision.

The Commission is aware that Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) has been used for a long time in organic
agriculture, apparently with a good safety record. The Commission is also aware of the experimental study
on exudates of the insecticidal toxin from insect resistant corn plants. Following the publication of these
new findings a procedure according to Article 16 of Directive 90/220/EC has been recently launched by
Germany. The reasons given for the application of the Article 16 procedure have been sent to the scientific
committee to see whether they constitute relevant scientific data that
invalidates the original risk
assessment for these products.

Based upon the opinion of the scientific committee on the issue, the Commission will take the appropriate
measures.

the Commission is
Under its Fifth framework research and technological development programme,
supporting biosafety research, which seeks to address all aspects of
the impacts of GMOs on the
environment. The results in a popular format will soon be published and made available to the Parliament.

(1) OJ L 117, 8.5.1990.

(2001/C 113 E/024)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1578/00

by William Newton Dunn (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 May 2000)

Subject: Testing for the carcinogenic properties of man-made vitreous fibres

I am informed that, during the mid-1990s, the Commission were conducting bio-persistence tests over a
five-year period in order to ascertain the carcinogenicity or otherwise of man-made vitreous fibres, for
example Rockwool and Glasswool.

Are the results of these tests known yet?

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(5 July 2000)

A Commission Directive of 1997 (1) laid down the classification and labelling of certain man-made vitreous
fibres according to their dangerous properties including tests for carcinogenicity. Article 2 of that Directive
states that (cid:145)During the period of five years after the entry into force of this Directive, the Commission shall
evaluate scientific developments and adopt measures to delete or amend Note Q(cid:146). Note Q relates to the
testing of the possible carcinogenic effects of such fibres.

The Commission is carrying forward the evaluation of a biopersistence test for inhalation, a so-called
(cid:145)90 days study(cid:146). Its evaluation is in progress in co-operation between the European Chemicals Bureau (ECB)
of the Joint Research Centre, fibre industry associations and a renowned test house. The first phase will be
finalised within several months from now. Further tests on biopersistence will be evaluated in the near
future in co-operation between the ECB, industry and several test houses.