WRITTEN QUESTION E-3442/00 by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Italian gene food ban.
Date: 2000-11-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European social policy, Italy, food inspection, maize, market approval, transgenic plant

19.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 174 E/55

(2001/C 174 E/055)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3442/00

by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(7 November 2000)

Subject: Italian gene food ban

The Commission has submitted a draft Decision requiring the Italian government to cancel its decree of
4 August 2000 banning the marketing and use of four genetically engineered maize products notified
under Articles 3(4) and 5 of the Novel Food Regulation 258/97 (1).

Italy has stated that in its opinion these products are not substantially equivalent and therefore should be
the subject of a full safety assessment and authorisation procedure.

In the draft opinion of the rapporteur for the Scientific Committee on Food (Professor Grunow) he states
that (cid:145)additional evidence for safety would be considered desirable if the products would undergo a re-
evaluation(cid:146) and explains that the current guidelines would require a different approach to that originally
applied by the UK competent authority and the Scientific Committee on Plants. He says indeed that (cid:145)the
Committee points out
the ACNFP has not distinguished between total and partial substantial
equivalence as it has been done in the SCF Guidelines for the Assessment of Novel Foods(cid:146) and that (cid:145)in
contrast to the ACNFP the Committee would apply these Guidelines(cid:146).

that

Will the Commission please explain:

1. Why these comments were suppressed in the final published opinion of the SCF?

2. Why,

in the interests of precaution, the Commission has not ordered a full re-evaluation of the

dossiers?

3. Whether, in the light of continuing public concern about the use of GMOs in the food chain and
the largely discredited substantial equivalence

advances in biochemical and toxicological testing,
concept, which simply tests for compositional analysis, should now be abandoned?

(1) OJ L 43, 14.2.1997, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(20 December 2000)

1.
Draft opinions are prepared for scientific debate by the scientific committee on food. They may
undergo modification before final adoption and cannot be taken as expressing the views of the scientific
committee on food. In this particular case all members,
including the rapporteur of the initial draft,
supported and adopted the final text published as the opinion of the scientific committee on food.

2.
The products in question have undergone safety assessments carried out by the British advisory
committee for novel foods and processes (ACNFP). Furthermore, in its opinion of 7 September 2000, the
scientific committee on food concluded that (cid:145)the information provided by the Italian authorities does not
provide detailed scientific grounds for considering that the use of the novel foods in question endangers
human health(cid:146).

This is in accordance with the report provided by the Istituto Superiore di SanitÆ which concludes, that, in
the present state of scientific information, there is no evidence that consumption of derivatives of the four
genetically modified organisms (GMOs) poses a risk to human or animal health.

The Commission is not aware of scientific documentation identifying potentially hazardous effects, which
could form the basis of a re-evaluation.

C 174 E/56

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

19.6.2001

The concept of substantial equivalence comprises a whole range of scientific considerations, and not

3.
only compositional analysis. It is considered to be a useful element in risk assessment of novel foods.

In the context of the review of the Regulation (EC) No 258/97 of the Parliament and of the Council of
27 January 1997, concerning novel foods and novel food ingredients, which is foreseen for next year, the
Commission intends to reconsider whether it is appropriate that genetically modified (GM) derived foods
and food ingredients benefit from the notification procedure.

(2001/C 174 E/056)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3450/00

by Jean-Claude Fruteau (PSE) to the Council

(8 November 2000)

Subject: Liberalisation of the Community market for LDCs

On 10 October 2000, the Council welcomed a Commission initiative seeking to abolish customs duties on
unlimited quantities of products from the least-developed countries (LDCs).

The proposed exemption from customs duties and quotas of all the products from the world(cid:146)s least-
developed countries would result in the abolition of restrictions on access to the Community market for
such sensitive products as bananas, rice and sugar.

With respect to those three products, liberalisation is scheduled to be carried out in three stages over a
three-year period as follows:

(cid:129) 20 % cut on 1 January 2001,

(cid:129) 50 % cut on 1 January 2002,

(cid:129) 80 % cut on 1 January 2003,

(cid:129) total exemption on 1 January 2004.

it would have a direct and adverse impact on traditional
If that proposal were adopted as it stands,
produce from the ultra-peripheral regions and,
in particular, on the overseas territories. For example,
production on RØunion, which is an integral part of the European Union, is subject to much heavier
welfare costs than the LDCs. If such exemption were actually introduced, my island would be placed in a
very difficult situation compared with Madagascar or the Comores Islands.

What measures does the Council intend to take in order to protect Community producers of rice, bananas
and sugar?

Reply

(26 February 2001)

Firstly, the Council would underline that the proposal for a Regulation to extend duty-free access without
any quantitative restrictions to products originating in the least-developed countries is currently being
examined by the technical bodies of the Council which deal with trade policy; a decision on this proposal
will be taken by the Council at a later stage.

This proposal stems from the Community initiative to improve access to the market for the least
advantaged economies, already included in the new Partnership Agreement with the ACP countries signed
in Cotonou on 23 June 2000.

Article 37(9) of that Agreement stipulates that in 2000 the Community will start a process, which, by the
end of multilateral trade negotiations and at the latest in 2005 will allow duty-free access for essentially all
products from all LDCs.