Replies to post #94204 on Biotech Values

[DewDiligence]

Anti-Monsanto activists could benefit from a lesson on tautology, evidently. In a recent video showing protesters blocking entry to a Monsanto facility in the Netherlands, an activist says:

Monsanto is destroying agriculture…blah blah… They claim Roundup reduces spraying of pesticides. But this is not true because there’s proof that it doesn’t.

Someone actually said that!

[DewDiligence]

EU Proposal Gives Member Countries Increased Latitude on GMO’s

[The proposal is double-edged for ag biotech companies such as MON, but is positive on balance, IMO, for the reason set forth in the text bewlo highlighted in red.]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704518904575364700243251906.html

›JULY 14, 2010
By DAVID TIDMARSH and ALESSANDRO TORELLO

BRUSSELS—European Union countries should have the power to restrict or ban cultivation of genetically modified crops, the European Commission proposed Tuesday, in an effort to speed up the biotech approval process and solve a long-standing controversy among countries.

"Experience with GMOs so far shows that member states need more flexibility to organize the coexistence of genetically modified and other types of crops," said Health and Consumer Policy Commissioner John Dalli in a statement.

The proposal from the commission, the EU's executive arm, would give EU member states the power to restrict or ban genetically modified crops, even after an EU approval procedure based on health and environment risk assessment has given a green light, the commission said.

Currently, the EU authorizes GMOs on a case-by-case basis. But a decade-long opposition by some member countries—who have to back the authorization by a super majority—has been slowing approvals, with decisions ultimately falling on the commission because of continued disagreements in national governments.

Tuesday's proposal should ease the authorization process because countries opposed to GMO crop cultivation won't have an interest in blocking the EU approval process any more, as they will have the ultimate power to restrict these plants in their own territory.

A bloc of countries, led by Greece, France, Austria and Hungary, have long opposed allowing the cultivation of GMO plants or even their importation into the EU, while other countries such as the U.K. and the Netherlands have favored their use.

One biotech crop, an anti-pest strain of maize developed by Monsanto Co., is already cultivated on EU soil, and 30 other GMOs have been approved for import in food and animal-feed usage. The EU has also approved a starch potato, called Amflora and developed by Germany's BASF SE [#msg-48575063]. Yet six EU member states—Austria, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, and Luxembourg—have already prohibited growing the Monsanto maize in their territory and taken safeguard measures against other GMOs.

In a rare case of similar views, industry and environmentalists expressed concerns that the commission proposal will effectively improve the situation--for opposite reasons.

"These proposals appear to give carte blanche to ban safe and approved GM crops in any country or region regardless of the needs or wishes of their farmers," said in a statement Carel du Marchie Sarvaas, director for agricultural biotechnology at EuropaBio, the association which represents dozens of biotech and chemical companies, including BASF and Monsanto.

At the same time, environmental organizations such as Friends of the Earth Europe and Greenpeace are worried that the new proposal will pave the way for more biotech crops in Europe, with crop contamination still spreading over the borders.

Farmers have concerns as well. The proposal might end up "jeopardizing the internal market for approved products and increasing distortions of competition among EU farmers," said Copa-Cogeca, the association representing EU farmers, in a statement.

The proposed new rules will now have to get a green light from the EU Parliament and a large majority of member countries to become law.‹

[DewDiligence]

BASF withdraws genetically-modified Amflora potato from Europe for lack of demand:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/business/global/17iht-gmo17.html

Amflora is not a food source, but rather an industrial crop for use in such products as glossy paper and concrete. Opponents argued that the potato should be banned because it could conceivably cross-pollinate with food potatoes, however unlikely that may be, but the product was approved by the EU Commission in Apr 2010 (#msg-48575063).

The only GM crops approved for growing in the EU that are still on the market are three varieties of corn sold by Monsanto (#msg-47335698). European countries do, however, import grain from GM crops grown in the US, Brazil, and Argentina.

[DewDiligence]

Denmark Seeks Settlement of Biotech-Seed Impasse

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/02/eu-gmo-cultivation-idUSL5E8D26FA20120202

›Thu Feb 2, 2012 12:29pm EST
By Charlie Dunmore

BRUSSELS, Feb 2 (Reuters) – Biotech companies should be allowed to grow genetically modified (GM) crops in some EU countries if they agree to avoid sales into the countries that want to ban them, a draft compromise proposal drawn up by Danish EU diplomats shows.

The compromise is designed to break a deadlock in talks among member states on draft EU rules to allow them to decide individually whether or not to ban GM cultivation - a proposal by the European Commission in 2010 that has made little headway so far.

"We are working on it. There is a blocking minority on the GMO proposals, and we are trying to do our utmost to find a solution and get agreement among member states," said a spokesman for the Danish EU presidency who declined to comment on the details of the compromise.

Under the plan, companies seeking EU approval to cultivate a GM crop would agree in advance not to market the product in those countries that do not want to grow it and in return would gain authorisation to grow the crops elsewhere in Europe, the draft seen by Reuters showed.

"Any decision (to ban cultivation) shall be communicated to the notifier, with the aim of reaching an agreement on the grounds upon which the concerned member state has based its decision," it said.

One EU biotech industry source said companies had yet to agree on a joint position regarding the proposal but that any progress towards approving new GM crops for cultivation in Europe was welcome.

"This is probably the last serious attempt to unblock the negotiations on the cultivation proposal," said the source, who declined to be identified.

In January, German biotech firm BASF Plant Science said that it was moving its plant biotech research activities from Germany to the United States and would cease all work to develop GM crops specifically for the EU market [#msg-70944800].

NATIONAL OPPOSITION

It is unclear whether the Danish compromise will be enough to overcome opposition to the Commission proposal from countries including France, which has said it wants to tighten the EU's risk assessment of GM crops before discussing the plans.

Other countries including Spain and Germany have raised concerns that the proposal would fragment the EU's single market by banning farmers in some EU countries from growing GM crops, while allowing others to press ahead.

Britain, meanwhile, is unlikely to support part of the Danish compromise that would allow countries to ban cultivation on environmental grounds, for example to prevent the emergence of herbicide-resistant weeds - a move backed by EU lawmakers.

The Commission proposed allowing national cultivation bans in July 2010 in a bid to break a deadlock in EU GM crop approvals, with just two varieties approved for cultivation in more than 12 years.

To date, seven EU countries have introduced national "safeguard" bans on growing Monsanto's MON 810 insect-resistant maize: France, Germany, Austria, Greece, Hungary, Luxembourg and Bulgaria.

A Commission source told Reuters that there were "some interesting elements in the Danish proposal", and that EU governments would hold further talks on the draft GM cultivation rules ahead of a scheduled debate by EU environment ministers on March 9.‹