2023-08-21 06:14:10
Detailed analysis and criticism of the EU proposal – new market research shows the clear rejection of the proposed deregulation for the new genetic engineering processes
Vienna (OTS) – The proposal by the EU Commission presented on July 5, 2023 to deregulate the New Genetic Engineering (NGT) process met with little approval from Austria’s consumers. This is confirmed by current market research commissioned by ARGE Gentechnik-frei (marketagent; n = 1,000): The planned deregulation for the majority of these processes is clearly rejected by 88.3 percent of those surveyed. 83.1 percent of those surveyed want products made from NGT to be controlled and regulated just as strictly as the previous genetic engineering. The EU Commission’s wish to abolish the labeling requirement was completely rejected: 89.9 percent of those surveyed would also like mandatory labeling for products made from NGT, directly on the food or feed.
The “White Paper” published today by ARGE Gentechnik-frei and the Federal Environment Agency lists numerous weaknesses in the European Commission’s proposal: The categorization of NGT plants proposed by the Commission is scientifically incomprehensible; essential questions of liability, patenting and coexistence are completely unresolved; the polluter pays principle and the precautionary principle laid down in the EU treaties would be undermined; Organic farming, which is particularly pronounced in Austria, and “Ohne Gentechnik” food production would come under massive pressure due to a lack of transparency, traceability and the lack of clear guidelines for coexistence in cultivation, transport and marketing. Expected conflicts about patents, liability and coexistence will become a problem for the entire food industry.
“Consumers do not want any food with genetic engineering – this applies to the entire EU, and especially to Austria. However, the legislative proposal threatens the right to freedom of choice enshrined in the EU treaties, since labeling requirements, traceability and clearly regulated approval procedures are to be abolished. The bill would destroy sustainable corporate values - after all, it is a clear attack on the precautionary principle of non-GM production, which is heavily influenced by the interests of the seed and biotech lobby, as it is in the “Ohne Gentechnik” and “Bio” sector is practiced, two of the fastest booming quality segments on the European market”, explains Florian Faber, managing director of ARGE Gentechnik-frei. “The proposed law is contradictory in itself and serves unilaterally to promote market access for NGT products – at the expense of GMO-free production.” According to Florian Faber, the EU Council and the EU Parliament must under no circumstances accept the proposal in this form.
Market research: Austria is clearly in favor of transparency, labeling and control
The survey (n = 1,000) conducted by marketagent in the second half of July 2023, i.e. shortly after the EU Commission presented the legislative proposal on July 5th, gives a clear picture of public opinion in Austria:
- for 77.8 percent of those surveyed, “produced without genetic engineering” is an important shopping motive.
- 84.5 percent want NGT products to continue to be labeled as “genetic engineering”.
- 83.1 percent want NGT products to be controlled and regulated just as strictly as “old” genetic engineering.
- 73.8 percent are of the opinion that the high quality of Austrian agriculture would be jeopardized by NGT.
- 81.5 percent believe that the proposed law would limit consumer rights and take away their freedom of choice.
- 89 percent believe that consumers have a right to know how the food they buy in stores was produced.
- The Austrians also have a clearly pronounced opinion when it comes to the use of new genetic engineering in food production:
– Only 11.7 percent support this; regardless of whether the products are labeled or not
– 54 percent support them; but only if the use of NGT is clearly marked on the product in the course of production and is thus recognizable for consumers.
– 34.3 percent fundamentally reject this. - 89.9 percent support the mandatory labeling of products made from NGT (food and feed) directly on the product.
- 75.0 percent fear that NGT in combination with the associated patents will lead to increased dependency on large seed companies and the agricultural industry.
- 74.1 percent are of the opinion that there must be a broad, social and interdisciplinary discussion about the goals and purposes that are to be achieved with the use of new genetic engineering. Only then should a decision be made on possible changes to the law on the basis of a cost-benefit analysis.
“White Paper”: Proposal “scientifically incomprehensible”
The one written by the experts of the Federal Environment Agency on behalf of the ARGE Gentechnik-frei is very clearly criticized White Paper: “New Genetic Engineering: Massive Need for Improvement in the Legislative Proposal of the EU Commission”. The analysis of the genetic engineering experts locates numerous weaknesses in the Commission’s proposal:
- The categorization of NGT plants into NGT 1 (these are exempted from the proven current approval, labeling and control regime) and NGT 2 (with a significantly simplified approval process and the possibility of being advertised as “sustainable”) scientifically and professionally incomprehensible. It represents a completely new form of product evaluation for Europe, which does not take into account essential European values - the precautionary principle, the polluter pays principle, freedom of choice for consumers.
- The one intended for NGT 1 plants complete abolition of the labeling requirement on food or feed violates the right of consumers to freedom of choice and gives farmers, processors and trade in the “organic” and “without genetic engineering” sector hardly any opportunity to keep NGT products out of their value chains; except with significantly higher (also: economic) effort than before.
- The ban on NGT plants for the “organic” sector is basically positive. However, as a result of the inadequate labeling and traceability, it will be very difficult to implement in practice and will involve a great deal of effort. Furthermore, the proposal lacks clear guidelines as to how this ban is to be handled.
- Essential economic questions remain unanswered: Who is liable in the event of incorrect use due to missing labeling? Or: What effects will the (existing) patents of large international corporations have on NGT plants and
-procedures on European seed breeding and agriculture? Are there massive patent conflicts in the event of any outcrossing?
ARGE Gentechnik-frei: “Attack by the EU Commission on GMO-free agriculture”
The assessment of the proposed law by the ARGE Gentechnik-frei is devastating: “The proposal is to be seen as a clear attack by the EU Commission on all areas of agriculture that work without genetic engineering. ‘Ohne Gentechnik’ and ‘Bio’ production alone generate around 4.5 billion euros in Austria.”explains Florian Faber. “The discussion of this failed legislative proposal is not, as has been claimed in recent weeks, about science and research and it is definitely not about banning a technology. But it is about dealing with it responsibly. Scientists can now conduct research in the field of new genetic engineering.”
“It works first and foremost about consumer protection and market access. On the one hand, the present proposal would massively curtail consumer rights by abolishing transparency, labeling and traceability for a specific food category. On the other hand – probably as a result of the massive and long-standing lobbying by the seed and biotech industry – the market access for NGT should be massively facilitated. This would significantly increase the effort and costs of the long-established and flourishing ‘organic’ and ‘without genetic engineering’ production. This cannot be in the spirit of a modern and contemporary food industry that relies on transparency and safety. And this is in clear contradiction to the Green Deal, which aims to expand organic farming in the EU to 25 percent by 2030. Science, too, should think twice about making itself the henchman of the biotech industry in its largely undifferentiated approval of the present legislative proposal“, so Florian Faber.
Questions & contact:
Florian Faber
ARGE GMO-free
f.faber@gentechnikfrei.at
0664-3819502
1692598547
#genetic #engineering #survey #Consumers #favor #transparency #control #labelling