THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE


8 March 2005



Dear Friends and colleagues,


RE: AUSTRIA RAISES QUESTIONS OVER GM MAIZE MON810


We wish to bring to you a statement by the government of Austria raising a number of issues of concern with regards to the commercial cultivation of genetically modified maize MON810.

In a note to the Council of the European Union, Austria stated that in light of prevalent scientific uncertainties about possible effects of the GM maize as well as the absence of a meticulous plan to monitor these effects, MON810 should not be commercially planted yet.

The scientific concerns that are increasingly recognized include: shortcomings in using the recombinant E.coli Bt protein product instead of the plant for toxicity and digestion studies; the need to study possible secondary metabolic changes in a GM plant as a result of the insertion of a foreign gene, and to apply better and more scientifically sound methods of chemical analysis which can provide data on the whole food.

Austria thus calls for the postponement of commercial growing of MON810 “until the open questions concerning a comprehensive environmental risk assessment and a suitable monitoring programme have been resolved and thresholds for the adventitious presence of GMOs in conventional seed varieties have been established”. Austria emphasizes that a review of the “old products” in 2006 will take place, as required by European law whereby GMO approvals have to be reviewed after 10 years. The inadequacies of current approaches and parameters in risk assessment, and new scientific evidence on possible adverse effects are expected to be considered during this review.

For countries which are considering the approval of MON810, the questions being put forward by Austria and the concerns it raised should be taken seriously and they are encouraged to take a similar precautionary approach in order to protect public health and the environment.


With best wishes,

Lim Li Lin and Chee Yoke Heong
Third World Network
121-S Jalan Utama
10450 Penang
Malaysia
Email: twnet@po.jaring.my
Website: www.twnside.org.sg

REF: Doc.TWN/Biosafety/2005/B


 http://register.consilium.eu.int/pdf/en/05/st06/st06968.en05.pdf


COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

Brussels, 3 March 2005

6968/05

ENV 101

AGRILEG 33

NOTE

from : General Secretariat of the Council

to : Delegations

Subject : Possible commercial cultivation of genetically modified maize MON810

Delegations will find attached a note from the Austrian delegation on the above subject, to be dealt with under "other business" at the Council (Environment) meeting on 10 March 2005.


ANNEX

Note from the Austrian delegation concerning the possible commercial cultivation of

GM-maize MON 810

Recently the Commission and some Member States received comprehensive documentation from NGOs concerning genetically modified BT Maize, in particular Maizeline MON 810, which may now be legally cultivated in Member States due to its registration in the European Catalogue of seed varieties.

In this documentation it is criticised that the risk assessment and the monitoring plan presented according to the old Directive 90/220/EEC do not correspond to the new requirements set up in Directive 2001/18/EC and its annexes.

This criticism goes in line with the Austrian argumentation when deciding to uphold its protective measures according to Article 23 of Directive 2001/18/EC. From Austria’s point of view national protective measures should therefore be maintained until a complete risk assessment according to Annex II of the Directive and a comprehensive monitoring plan according to Annex VII of the Directive and its complementing guidelines are put forward. This should happen anyway in the year 2006 when re-evaluation of these "old products" has to take place.

For similar reasons Hungary has also taken a national measure according to the safeguard clause of Article 23 of Directive 2001/18/EC.

Austria therefore would like to address three questions to the Commission:

1. How will the Commission evaluate this documentation including the new scientific evidence mentioned therein?

2. Would it not be advisable -- in the light of obvious scientific uncertainty about possible adverse effects of MON810 (but also Bt176) on the environment and in view of the fact that a meticulous plan to monitor possible effects has not been presented -- to withdraw the  proposals to repeal national measures until open questions have been clarified, as requested by Austria in its letter to the Commission in December 2004.

3. Would it not be recommendable -- in view of the problem of coexistence -- to postpone commercial growing of MON 810 until the open questions concerning a comprehensive environmental risk assessment and a suitable monitoring programme have been resolved and thresholds for the adventitious presence of GMOs in conventional seed varieties have been
established?