Tag Archives: European Parliament

NGTs in the EU: why the new amendments should be rejected

Posted on by
Reply

A French association and three German associations representing geneticists, agronomists, and other academic and professional figures involved in the field of plant biotechnology have sent a letter to Members of the European Parliament urging them to vote against the latest amendments concerning new genomic techniques (NGTs). The joint message is addressed in particular to the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI). It defends the text developed over years of negotiations by the European institutions (the Trilogue) and responds point by point to its critics. Further delaying the approval of the new regulation, the experts argue, would hinder the development of solutions needed to tackle the climate challenge and would damage Europe’s competitiveness (currently, more than 50% of peer-reviewed NGT research comes from China, while the EU accounts for only 15%).

Continue reading →

Will edited plants be patentable in EU?

Posted on by
Reply

A year after the European Parliament voted to ban patents, EU countries still seek a compromise on NGT regulation

The revision of the regulatory framework for genetically modified plants currently underway in Europe aims to keep pace with technological advances and support the development of sustainable agriculture. The scientific community, the seed industry, and major farmers’ associations view the overall framework positively, but the devil is still in the details.

Continue reading →

Time to give NGTs a chance

Posted on by
Reply

Marco Pasti grows corn, soybeans, wheat, barley, sugar beets, potatoes, some wine grapes and walnuts on his farm near Venice, in Italy. In addition to being a farmer, he is an advocate for science-based agriculture. Don’t miss his opinion piece written for the Global Farmer Network after the European Parliament vote on the New Genomic Techniques last February. After the EU elections next June, the path of the new regulatory framework will resume, which could mark a turning point “in favor of sound science – and possibly a major break from the mistakes of the past when Europeans treated crop innovation with skepticism and even fear.”

CRISPR plants – what the EU Parliament got right and wrong

Posted on by
Reply

There is no doubt that this is good news: on February 7, the European Parliament approved the Commission’s regulatory proposal on New Genomic Techniques, covering also CRISPR plants. Some of the approved amendments (particularly the one on genetic modification of polyploid plants) have the effect of improving the text, others risk being a problem and should be reconsidered during the trilogue with member states (particularly the requirement to label all final products, even if they do not contain foreign genes). The European Parliament also brought in the issue of non-patentability of NGT plants, which would deserve to be addressed elsewhere. For more information, this is the position expressed on February 14 by European Plant Science Organisation (EPSO).

A letter to Europe from CRISPR inventors and a thousand other scientists

Posted on by
Reply

Dear Members of the European Parliament, 

In these times of climate crisis, biodiversity loss and renewed food insecurity, a scientific and evidence-based approach is essential in every respect. Now more than ever, we must rise above ideology and dogmatism. That is why we the undersigned turn to you and urge you to carefully consider the benefits of embracing New Genomic Techniques (NGTs) in your upcoming parliamentary decisions. As concerned citizens who believe in the power of science to improve our lives and our relationship with the planet, we implore you to vote in favour of NGTs, aligning your decisions with the advancements in scientific understanding. Conventional breeding for climate resilient crops (with cross-breeding of certain traits, subsequent selection and then backcrossing to remove undesirable traits) is too time-consuming. It takes years, decades even. We do not have this time in an era of climate emergency.  

[Here you can read the full text of the letter and subscribe to it]