The new laws require that producers are able to trace the GM content of all products and that all food with more than 0.9 per cent genetically modified content is labelled. In separate measures, new directives enable individual EU countries to impose restrictions on how GM crops are grown to prevent contamination of organic crops by GM varieties.
Campaigners were dismayed in the days before the vote when the UK government lobbied MEPs to vote against regulation that would tighten the rules on GM labelling.
A briefing document for UK MEPs, produced by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and the Food Standards Agency, described measures to deal with contamination as “unhelpful” and criticised the 0.9 per cent limit as “unwelcome.” The document argued: ‘the lower the threshold, the more difficult it would become to make the regulation practically effective to the benefit of genuine consumer choice.”
But Friends of the Earth, who obtained the document, rubbished the government’s claims. They said: “Most supermarkets and food manufacturers already have systems in place that can detect GM material at much lower levels to a 0.1 per cent limit of detection. The government’s own Central Science Laboratory has confirmed that this level of detection is accurate.”
Despite government worries about the stringency of the new EU laws, some critics believe they are not strong enough. In a report, ‘Towards a GM free Europe – Halting the spread of GMOs’, Green MEP Caroline Lucas argues that the new rules do not properly address the risk of contamination and will not protect the consumer. She said: “Research conducted by the European Commission, Defra and the European Environment Agency all conclude that licensing GM crops will almost inevitably lead to widespread contamination of non-GM crops.
“If we are to ensure the public has the right to choose whether to reject GM, we must ensure not only that GM is labelled, but that non-GM continues to exist. Unless we can address the problems of contamination, that cannot be guaranteed.”
Lucas argues the EU’s five-year-ban on new GM products should therefore remain. She said: “It is essential the moratorium stays in place at least until liability rules are agreed and, crucially, until someone works out if there is a way of maintaining the co-existence of GM and non-GM crops.”
The UK government launched a debate on GM products in early June called the GM Nation debate. It was scheduled to end on 18 July although a group of MPs, led by former environment minister Michael Meacher, have tabled an early day motion calling on the government to extend the debate until more research evidence is available.
The government must decide how wide buffer zones between organic and GM crops must be, and whether or not the GM-food industry will be liable for any genetic pollution or possible health and environmental impacts of GM crops.
Friends of the Earth campaigner Pete Riley said: “the government is clearly trying to rush through this debate as quickly as possible, with as little input from the public as possible. European politicians must take action to enable consumers to say no to GM.”
#232: Rue Britannia ● The legacy of the British Empire ● An interview with Priyamvada Gopal ● The People’s Olympics ● An interview with Neville Southall ● Agribusiness in India ● Deliveroo’s disastrous IPO ● Latest book reviews ● And much more!
And you choose how much to pay for your subscription...
Marcus Rashford is challenging neoliberal framings of poverty. We should call him a hero, argues Siobhan McGuirk – without letting his sponsors off the hook
Leander Jones looks at the role of community supported agriculture as a 21st-century antidote to the destructive and increasingly fragile corporate agricultural model
Oli Carter-Esdale explores the weaponisation of the pint and asks: where next for the hospitality sector?
Whether it’s growing your own food or enjoying the countryside, people of colour are asserting their right to the land in Britain. Amy Hall reports
A new book from OrganicLea, the food growing cooperative in East London, ponders the personal and political of growing food
There’s nothing inherently wrong with genetic modification, argues Leigh Phillips, and the left shouldn’t side with those who suggest there is. Below, Emma Hughes responds
Want to try Red Pepper before you take out a subscription? Sign up to our newsletter and read Issue 231 for free.