NGT legislation nears completion, but feed and oilseed groups raise concerns over labeling provisions
Those trade groups, in collaboration with COCERAL, issued a joint statement following the recent vote.
For the EU to effectively provide the farming community with New Genomic Techniques (NGTs) as a novel tool for addressing climate change and meeting the sustainability goals outlined in the Green Deal, some further tweaking of the legislative text is required, they argued.
The vote
The EU Parliament endorsed its stance on the EU Commission's NGTs proposal during this week's plenary session, securing 307 votes in favor, 263 against, and 41 abstentions.
MEPs aligned with the European People’s Party (EPP) and the Renew party expressed strong support for the text, while the Greens and the Left largely opposed it, as reported by EurActiv.
The Commission's legislative objective is to enhance the sustainability and resilience of the food system by developing improved plant varieties that exhibit climate resilience, pest resistance, and increased yields, while minimizing the need for fertilizers and pesticides.
NGT plants currently adhere to the same regulations as genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
MEPs support the proposal to establish two distinct categories and sets of rules for NGT plants: NGT 1 plants, considered equivalent to conventional ones, would be exempted from GMO legislation requirements, while other NGT plants (NGT 2 plants) would still be subject to stricter regulations.
Copa and Cogeca, the influential EU agriculture lobby, view this approach as "balanced."
Spotlight on compulsory labeling
MEPs, though, are advocating for mandatory labeling of products from both NGT 1 and NGT 2 plants.
EU feed industry representatives, FEFAC, and the other two associations are firmly against the idea of such labelling, arguing that it could jeopardize the distinction between NGTs deemed akin to conventionally bred varieties and those to be treated like GMOs, hindering technology adoption and muddling information conveyed to citizens and consumers.
MEPs also call for the Commission to report on the evolving perceptions of consumers and producers regarding these new techniques, seven years after their implementation. Additionally, they support a ban on patents for NGT plants, plant material, and genetic information to mitigate legal uncertainties, reduce costs, and prevent new dependencies for farmers and breeders.
Council told to avoid repeating past mistakes
Jan Plagge, president of IFOAM Organics Europe, responded to the vote:
“The Council of Ministers should not repeat the same mistakes of rushing these discussions and disregarding the lack of scientific basis to deregulate some of these novel genomic techniques pointed by the French food safety authority.
"National governments should first provide a legal solution to protect breeders and farmers from patents, and to protect the integrity of organic and conventional GMO-free production, before moving ahead with weakening biosafety requirements."
