Science-based, precautionary approach comes under attack, according to media report

A paywalled article from Tagesspiegel Background, which provides detailed briefings from the German publication Tagesspiegel Magazine on the background to political developments, covers the working session of the Council of the EU on 19 July. The session dealt with the "non-paper" from Hungary (the current Presidency of the Council), which raised many important questions about the proposal from the Commission to deregulate new GMOs (new genomic techniques, NGTs).

While GMWatch considers the "non-paper" (it's apparently called that because it's informal and not completely official) to be science-based and precautionary, the Tagesspiegel Background report portrays its reception negatively. We don't know how much of this negativity reflects just Tagesspiegel's own stance and how much is simply factual reporting. But if it is the latter, the situation looks bad for citizens and the environment.

Over the twelve pages of the "non-paper", the Hungarian Presidency had outlined fundamental questions and concerns about the deregulation proposals. But according to Tagesspiegel Background, "In the relevant preparatory body of the Council, this was anything but well received by most member delegations. They spoke of a 'step backwards', but the German delegation reserved the right to follow up."

The article continues, "From the Council Presidency's point of view, there are concerns in ten areas of the EU Commission's draft regulation and in any case a great need for clarification... The points - from the criteria for defining category 1 genetically modified plants to the scope of the regulation and the verification process - were put on the table at the meeting of the responsible working group in the Council on 19 July."

The article adds, "While Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia welcomed this approach according to informed circles, a majority of EU member delegations opposed it. Denmark, Spain, Estonia, Finland, France, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Latvia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden and, in some cases, Malta and Poland emphasised that reopening the issues raised by Hungary would be a step backwards.

"In their view, a decision had already been taken on this by qualified majority in February. Accordingly, negotiations should continue on the basis of the compromise text presented at the time, which was supported by 17 member states. This position also characterised the subsequent discussion of the individual issues, which was nevertheless carried through by the Council Presidency."

GMWatch was under the impression that the Council had NOT reached a qualified majority position in favour of a deregulation text in February, and that the deregulation proposal was therefore blocked. So this statement, if true, is news to us.

According to the Hungarian Presidency, Germany and all other Member States should now submit their comments, remarks, questions and any additional concerns in writing by 20 August.