WRITTEN QUESTION E-2087/00 by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Fields in which further research would be useful.
Date: 2000-06-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: crop production, foodstuff, genetically modified organism, research policy, scientific research

C 113 E/64

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2001

(2001/C 113 E/062)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2087/00

by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Fields in which further research would be useful

(28 June 2000)

Does the Commission consider that the research projects previously undertaken in Member States and
supported by the EU itself in the fields of testing and assessment of GM crops and foodstuffs are sufficient
to enable a comprehensive range of testing procedures to be agreed and put in place with regard to the
testing of such substances; if not, in which fields does the Commission consider that further research
would be useful?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-2079/00, E-2080/00, E-2081/00 and E-2087/00
given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(5 October 2000)

The Commission has recently (press release of 13 July 2000) indicated its intentions with regard to the
approval process for genetically modified organisms(cid:146) (GMO). The objective is to resume the authorisation
process for GMOs in the near future whilst addressing public concerns on GMOs as well as problems of
legal uncertainty for those concerned. Further research on the safety testing of GMOs as well as research
on detection methods and traceability of GMOs is an essential contribution to the package of measures
which has been proposed.

Concerning research on the safety testing of GMOs risk assessment needs to address the final characteristic
of the organism and the circumstances of its application in relation to possible risks to human health and
the environment. Research on potential risks of genetically modified (GM) crops has been supported under
successive framework programmes since 1986. A total of 63 projects involving 412 laboratories costing
€ 48,5 million has not indicated any inherent risks in genetic engineering and has established that the
safety of GM crops under consideration is comparable to that of conventionally bred crops.

A number of projects relating to the safety of food derived from GMOs are currently being supported by
the fifth framework programme (FP5) and are described in the brochure (cid:145)European Network (cid:129) safety
assessment of genetically modified food crops(cid:146) which is sent directly to the Honourable Member and
Parliaments(cid:146) Secretariat.

Further research will be supported to address remaining areas of uncertainty and concern which have been
raised in public debate. Particular attention will be paid to monitoring of larger-scale experiments for
longer-term environmental impacts. Support will be provided under the Quality of life and management of
living resources programme, key action (KA1) (cid:145)Food, nutrition and health(cid:146) (in particular the action line on
(cid:145)Quality monitoring and traceability throughout the food chain(cid:146)) and KA3 (cid:145)The cell factory(cid:146) (in particular
the action line on (cid:145)Development of methods and strategies to ensure the safety of new biomolecules or
bioprocesses, and for the identification of recombinant organisms, their residues in the environment, and
their impact on human and animal health)(cid:146). Deadlines for proposals will be October 2000.

Research on food safety in general continues to have high priority in FP5. Calls for proposals under this
programme enable flexibility of response to meet emerging needs and unpredictable policy concerns. KA1
on food, nutrition and health within the quality of life and management of living resources programme is
currently funding 21 research projects on food safety with a total Community contribution of € 30,3
million. In addition, five research projects are currently in the negotiation phase for a total Community
contribution of € 5,4 million. Finally, a second call for proposals was published on 15 December 1999 (1)
on food safety and food technology. The budget for this call has been set at € 39 million (October 2000
deadline).

Research on detection methodology for GMO research provides essential support
for labelling and
traceability of GMOs and is carried out under the FP 5 and by the Commission(cid:146)s Joint Research Centre
(JRC).

18.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 113 E/65

Under the competitive and sustainable growth programme of the FP 5 further research will be focused on
the development of instrumentation, methodologies, databases, sampling plans and reference materials in
order to validate the labelling of GMO foods and interpretation of data. Additional support is provided for
development, preparation and certification of reference materials containing GMOs for identification,
calibration and quality control related to antifraud activities. The research results coming from these
projects will provide scientific support to the European authority on food safety.

The JRC coordinates a network of Member State laboratories on the further development and validation of
DNA (cid:129) and protein (cid:129) based detection methods. Moreover, the JRC has many activities to support directly
the Commission within the field of food safety. The budget allocated to these activities in FP5 is in the
order of € 50 million over four years.

Several detection methods for quantitative and qualitative analyses exist in Member States and a number
have been validated by the JRC. Examples include a detection (screening) method for raw and processed
materials and quantitative methods for products derived from GM-soybeans and GM-maize.

(1) OJ C 361, 15.12.1999.

(2001/C 113 E/063)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2125/00

by Francisca Sauquillo PØrez del Arco (PSE) to the Commission

(30 June 2000)

Subject: Report on the 1998 discharge. Closing document of 6 June 2000 (SEC(1999) 412 (cid:129) C5-0006/

1999 (cid:129) 1999/2050(DEC))

In the draft report on the discharge for the 1998 financial year, paragraph 72 of the motion for a
resolution reads as follows:

Notes the Commission(cid:146)s statement that not all the available evidence in the disciplinary proceedings
against the former Director of ECHO in connection with the misappropriation of humanitarian aid
funds has been duly taken into account.

Whether or not the draft report is eventually adopted as it now stands, the wide distribution of the
document within and outside the Community institutions has plainly given rise to confusion as regards the
conduct and regularity of the disciplinary proceedings against the former Director of ECHO. Bearing in
mind that in its previous answers to written questions from the EP and earlier documents produced in
response to EP questionnaires and reports, the Commission has said exactly the opposite of the assertions
being made by the rapporteur on the discharge to be given in respect of budgetary management in the
1998 financial year:

1.
Can the Commission confirm that it has indeed made a statement to the effect that the disciplinary
board did not take all the available evidence into account in the disciplinary proceedings against the
former Director of ECHO?

2.
Should the Commission stand its ground in keeping with its previous statements that all of the
available evidence was supplied to the disciplinary board, can it tell the EP quite explicitly and adduce
every necessary detail to prove that the disciplinary board hearing the case against the former Director of
ECHO was definitely in possession of the full body of existing evidence and documents?

3.
If the position is as set out in point 2 above, will the Commission make good the damage to the
personal integrity and professional interests of the former Director of ECHO resulting from the Commis-
sion(cid:146)s ambiguous messages and its failure to inform Parliament in clear terms about the conduct of the
disciplinary proceedings?

4.
Can the Commission say exactly why it has written to the former Director of ECHO to prohibit him
from appearing before the Committee on Budgetary Control or any other parliamentary body in order to
dispel the EP(cid:146)s anxieties by shedding full light on the situation and to produce all the relevant documents?