Opting out – What does it mean to be ‘GM-free’?

If a country doesn’t grow GMOs – but continues to sell them to consumers as food or hidden in animal feed – can it really call itself ‘GM free’?

October 14, 2015 by Pat Thomas

Photo: Bigstock

What does being “GM free” mean?

For most of us it means not growing GMOs and it means not eating GMOs. It’s that simple.

But in the European Union right now – in spite of what you may have read – we are struggling with the idea of what being GMO free means. And it’s likely to be a long struggle.

Changes to the law in January 2015 allowed EU countries to opt out of growing GMOs. A separate piece of legislation which looked at the import of GMOs – including for human food and animal feed – has proved so unacceptable to Member States that it has yet to be finalised and this is now not likely to happen before the summer of 2016.

This means that most of what you have read about the European opt outs has been focussed on cultivation.

If you follow the EU GMO issue, you’ve probably seen banner headlines, particularly on social media, such as “Europe rejects GMOs” or “Victory as Europeans say no to GMOs”.  The reality is a little different.

EU countries lay down the gauntlet

The opt out process is complex and divided into several parts. The first part, a transition phase for the new law, gave EU countries until October 3 to tell the European Commission that they wanted to opt out of the cultivation of any approved crops or crops whose approval was pending.

There is currently only one GMO crop approved for cultivation in the EU – a type of pesticide-producing maize known as MON806. But many other crops for feed and food have been approved or are close to approval.

By the closing date 17 EU countries (Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland and Slovenia) and four regional administrations (Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland in the UK, and Wallonia in Belgium) had laid down a gauntlet and applied to the Commission to opt out of the cultivation of several GM maize varieties. Together these countries represent more than 65% of the EU’s population and 65% of its arable land.

But biotech companies have the final say

These requests will be passed on to the biotech companies who have bene given the authority to accept or reject the application. The biotech companies have 30 days to do so. After that time, if they have not responded, the Commission will rule in favour of the Member State and the opt out will be considered agreed.

Nobody know what happens next if the biotech companies say no. Under the new legislation EU countries have very little protection in law if they persist in rejecting GMOs.

What is more, since EU countries can’t opt out of cultivation wholesale – thus any headlines proclaiming a ‘total ban’ on GM are completely misleading and encourage a false sense of security. Instead countries are obliged to opt out on a crop by crop basis so this is a scenario that is likely to be repeated again and again as new crops, such as the herbicide-tolerant MON887427 maize, slip quietly, and uncontested, through our flawed approval process.

Not long after the closing date a new twist in the tale emerged when Syngenta withdrew two out of four of its GM maize varieties awaiting EU approval. These were pesticide-producing MIR 604 and pesticide-producing and herbicide-resistant Bt11xMIR604xGA21.

Countries can still opt out after the October 3 deadline but the process is more complex (you can read a full explanation of the opt out process on the main Beyond GM site).

A first step

In fact, it is too early to say which direction the EU will go when it comes to GMOs.

These first opt outs are crucial and it is encouraging to see so many EU countries taking initiative. But they are not the end of the story. They are only a tentative first step.

Until the Lawson the import of GMOs is sorted out consumers cannot be sure that their countries are GMO-free. At the moment it is entirely possible that a country could reject the cultivation of GMOs but still import and sell GMO foods, and of course animal feeds (around 60% of Europe’s animals are already fed on GMO feed).

And of course opting out of cultivation or even imports does not restrict research and development. So, again, a country could opt out of planting or eating GMOs, but continue to develop them for sale for people in other countries to eat.

Be clear – speak out

So what does it mean to be “GM free”?

This discussion – which is full of twists and turns and ethical dilemmas – urgently needs to take place at public level so that consumers are clear in their own minds about what they want and able to articulate that to their elected representatives (and also to the places where they buy food), It also needs to take place at government and policy-making level so that our laws truly reflect the will of the people.

If you question GMOs, the mainstream press is unlikely to give space to your views. The pro-GM bias of organisations like the BBC is well known. We initiated the GM Free Me visual petition to give the majority in the UK who oppose GMOs a face and a voice – and therefore make them harder to ignore. Now, more than ever we need people to speak out. Please take a moment to take part by uploading your photo to our growing gallery and help us keep the pressure up on the UK government to implement strong and sensible GM-free policies.

Like what we're doing? Help us do more!
Let your MP know

You can find your MP and get in touch directly by visiting www.writetothem.com

Beyond false promises. Beyond failed technology. Beyond corporate control.
The time has come to move Beyond GM.

About this site::
GM Free Me is a Beyond GM initiative. Submitting your photo to this site is a vote for a safer, healthier more sustainable food system, for the health of our plants, animals and soil, for the independence and future security of our farmers. Thank you for speaking up.    Read more...