According to Euractiv, the European Commission justified the scientific robustness of the new legislation regarding new genetically engineered plant techniques during a hearing before the European Parliament's Environment Committee, challenging the critical observations of the French food agency Anses.

In the hearing, the Commission defended its proposal.

In two opinions published in November 2023 and March 2024, the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety openly contested the main elements of the Commission's 2023 draft legislation on plants edited with the latest DNA modification techniques, also known as New Genomic Techniques (NGTs).

Klaus Berend from the Commission's Directorate-General for Health emphasized that the draft law is based on scientific research provided by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) "since 2012," as well as on impact analyses on human and animal health, the environment, and economic and social risks.

He also recalled a letter signed by Nobel Prize laureates defending the safety of NGTs.

The Commission proposed two categories of NGTs: When genetic modifications are minor (category 1), plants will be regulated according to conventional plant breeding rules; for more pronounced modifications (category 2), stricter GMO legislation applies.

Anses' opinions criticized the NGT classification criteria, suggesting a case-by-case risk assessment approach.

Berend responded that "no risk study is necessary," citing EFSA's work and requesting the application of "logic." "When the same modification occurs with conventional techniques or with NGTs, NGTs cannot have greater risks," he emphasized.

Anses stood its ground. "Anses is not against the NGT product classification mechanism, but is in favor of a solid, applied system with graded assessments that do not contradict other countries," explained Matthieu Schuler, its general director.

Regarding the "equivalence" criteria of NGTs with conventionally grown plants, Schuler reiterated the need for "precise definitions," including defining a conventional plant and techniques compatible with category 1.

Additionally, Anses' chief called for a permanent monitoring network to determine potential adverse effects on plants or wildlife derived from genetically modified plants.

"We expect increased use and, therefore, increased exposure to NGT products," which is why experts recommend effective post-market surveillance, Schuler added.

Anses relies on other agencies, especially the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), to ensure that the regulatory framework and selection techniques evolve in a "consistent manner." According to Schuler, this collaboration "has already begun."

He suggested creating a "GMO network" to work on these guidelines in the future.

EFSA is expected to issue its own opinion on Anses' first opinion, following a request from the European Parliament on February 22.

The Debate

The European Parliament approved its position on the draft law at the plenary session on February 7, but the Council failed to reach a consensus, postponing a possible final version until the next legislature, after the EU elections in June.

When Anses published its second opinion on March 6, Le Monde accused the French government of delaying the study's publication, from January 22, to avoid influencing European negotiations on the new NGT rules.

Schuler explained that Anses "published the report eight weeks after signing and transmitting it to the ministry, which is a common deadline according to French law."

The French national health and food safety agency published a report on Wednesday (March 6) recommending that genetically modified plants be assessed "case by case," questioning a legal text under negotiation in EU institutions.

During the exchange of views, rapporteur Jessica Polfjärd (EPP) defended the European text, emphasizing the opinions of German, Dutch, and Belgian agencies, which were more lenient towards the European Commission's proposal.

"Anses rather defends a minority position," repeated Czech MEP Alexandr Vondra from the conservative right ECR.

French S&D MEP Christophe Clergeau supported Anses, saying that "for now, the only science on the table is Anses' opinion, which should be taken seriously."

"This legislation is outdated," he added, pointing to the "equivalence" criteria "currently being debated" by scientists.

German Green MEP Martin Hausling spoke in the same vein. He supported Anses' criticisms and called for "further investigations" and a new "risk assessment" of the legislative proposal. (Photo: Dreamstime)