WRITTEN QUESTION E-1504/03 by Elly Plooij-van Gorsel (ELDR) to the Commission. Measurability of GMO material in food products.
Date: 2003-05-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: evaluation method, food inspection, food standard, genetically modified organism, labelling, traceability

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/717

(2004/C 78 E/0765)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1504/03

by Elly Plooij-van Gorsel (ELDR) to the Commission

Subject: Measurability of GMO material in food products

(5 May 2003)

The Commission proposal for a directive on traceability and labelling of genetically modified organisms
(GMOs) is currently awaiting its second reading by the European Parliament. An important precondition
and premise of the directive is that consumers must be able to choose between products which contain
GMO material and those which do not.

On 28 November 2002 the Agriculture Council reached agreement on the Commission proposal, setting
thresholds for determining whether or not a product would have to be labelled as containing GMO
material.

The Council decided that there was no need to label a product as containing GMO material unless it
contained at least 0,9 %.

At the same time a threshold of 0,5 % was set for adventitious GMO material which is not permitted but
which an assessment has shown to be risk-free. This ‘tolerance threshold’ will remain in force for three
years.

The Commission welcomed the Council’s agreement. On 4 December 2002 the Commission inaugurated
the European network of GMO laboratories. This network of 45 European laboratories will cooperate in
identifying and quantifying GMOs and producing reference
the development of methods of tracing,
material.

The system for tracing GMOs will require suitable instruments and testing methods.

To what extent can the presence of GMO material in food products in such marginal quantities

1.
genuinely be measured, in the Commission’s opinion?

Are adequate instruments and suitable testing methods already in use which can trace the presence of

2.
GMOs?

If so, are these instruments and methods equally available in all Member States and are the

3.
instruments and methods of the same standard in all Member States?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(17 July 2003)

The Commission would like to stress that the thresholds agreed in the Common Position on the
food and feed (1) relate only to adventitious or technically

1.
Regulation on genetically modified (GM)
unavoidable presence of genetically modified material.

Furthermore,
the requirements to trace genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and food and feed
produced from GMOs have been agreed in the Common Position on traceability and labelling of GMOs
food and feed produced from GMOs. These requirements are based on paper
and traceability of
documentation and implies that operators must have systems in place to be able to identify from whom
they received such products and to whom they have sold such products. The common position does not
include an obligation for operators to test products for presence of GM material. Where no analytical
detection methods are currently available, the accuracy and truthfulness of the information being provided
on labels can be controlled through the traceability system.

Concerning analytical methods, presence of GMOs is measured by determining the amount of GM-specific
DNA or proteins present in a certain sample, thus it is usually necessary for those running a test to know
the characteristics of the specific GMO(s) they are searching for.

C 78 E/718

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

The equipment for GMO analysis is widely available in the enforcement and private laboratories of
2.
different Member States. Protocols for detection of approved GMOs are also available, as indicated in the
Commission Recommendation of 25 January 2002 concerning a co-ordinated programme for the official
control of foodstuffs for 2002 (2). To facilitate detection, the proposed GM food and feed legislation will
require the notifier to provide a method as part of the authorisation procedure as well as to submit the
material for the production of certified reference materials.

3.
All Member States are understood to have sufficient instruments and methods available that meet
adequate standards. Moreover, the Commission operates the European Network of GMO Laboratories. The
network consists of more than 40 control
laboratories located in Member States and provides full
participation to Accession Countries. It is also interacting with all Union global trade partners. One of the
objectives is to facilitate the enforcement of the rules for labelling and traceability of GMOs in the food
chain.

(1) OJ C 113 E, 13.5.2003.
(2) OJ L 26, 30.1.2002.

(2004/C 78 E/0766)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1531/03

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 April 2003)

Subject: Importation of canned tuna from Thailand and the Philippines

In November 2001, the EU, Thailand and the Philippines agreed to hold talks within the framework of the
WTO aimed at assessing the extent to which the preferential tariffs accorded to canned tuna originating
from the ACP countries was damaging the interests of Thailand and the Philippines. It proved impossible
to reach a solution acceptable to all parties and the European Community, Thailand and the Philippines
agreed to submit the matter to arbitration. On 20 December 2002, the arbitrator ruled that the European
Community should open a ‘most favoured nation’-type tariff quota of 25 000 tonnes for 2003 at an ad
valorem rate of duty of 12 %. The Commission agreed to the arbitrator’s proposal and has just presented a
proposal for a Council regulation on opening and providing for the administration of that tariff quota (1).
Article 4 of that proposal lays down that the provisions in force in the Community shall apply when
determining the origin of canned tuna qualifying for the tariff quota. Under Article 24 of Regulation (EEC)
No 2913/92 (2), goods whose production has involved more than one country shall be deemed to originate
in the country where they underwent their last substantial processing or working.

In the light of the Community legislation on rules of origin currently in force, could the Commission
indicate whether, under the regulation being adopted, canned tuna originating from Thailand and the
Philippines will be considered to have been undergone its last processing in those countries, regardless of
the origin of the raw materials processed?

Is the Commission aware that the application of these provisions on rules of origin could strip the
proposal for a regulation of its purpose, which is to grant preferential treatment solely to canned tuna
from Thailand and the Philippines and not to open up the EU market to tuna products coming from other
Asian countries such as Indonesia, etc.?

Is the Commission aware of the damage that the implementation of these rules of origin might occasion to
the EU tuna processing industry, which is located largely in Objective 1 areas that are highly dependent on
fishing? What measures has it adopted, or will it adopt, to prevent this situation from arising?

(1) COM(2003) 141 final.
(2) OJ L 302, 19.10.1992, p. 1.