1507

For the third time now the EFSA has given a positive opinion on the two maize events Bt11 and 1507.
In November 2007, Environmental Commissioner Dimas had proposed that an approval for cultivation for these Bt-maize events should not be given. In May 2008 the Commission send the two notifications back to the EFSA with the explicit question to review eleven scientific studies that had come out since the EFSA gave its last opinion. Now on 29 October 2008, the EFSA once more gave an opinion - and once more it is positive.
How can it be that over years now the Competent Authorities of several memberstates as well as the DG Environment sees risks in the cultivation of these Bt maize - but the EFSA simply maintains their position that everything is fine? Do the members of the GMO Panel have such a completely different view on what makes a risk?

On Wednesday, 7 May 2008, the EU Commission refered three GM crops back to the EFSA: the GM starch potato Amflora and the two Bt maize events Bt11 and 1507. Environmental Commissioner Dimas had already announced earlier that he would propose to reject the two Bt maize. Referring the cses back to the EFSA atthis stage might be an historic step, but unfortunately it is not to be expected that the EFSA GMO Panel will now change its mind, so in the long run the issue of GM cultivation willstill need tobe resolved where it belongs: in the political arena.

For the first time the EU Environmental Commissioner Dimas proposed to reject applications for the cultivation of GMOs. The crops in question are the two Bt maize events Bt11 (Syngenta) and 1507 maize (Pioneer HiBred/Dow).
The proposal is apparently based on clear scientific evidence proving that the cultivation of these two GM crops has the potential to cause environmental harm. Nevertheless both crops had gotten a positive opinion from the EFSA in 2005. [Bt11, 1507]

Once again no qualified majorities could be found to approve the import of GM crops. However, under EU regulation it is not important whether enough countries are in favour of it, but whether enough countries are against it. Is the EU ministers’ impasse once again favouring the biotech companies?