Stating a concern that the proposed law would lead to the reintroduction of border controls between GM and non-GMO-growing countries, the European Parliament news service reported that Members of the Environment Committee shot down a draft EU law that would allow member states to restrict or prohibit sales of genetically modified crops.
This vote goes against numerous EU states that have made it clear in recent months that they plan to instate total bans on GM crops. A total of 19 EU countries have sent letters to the EP saying that they plan GM bans, citing concern over spoiling agricultural markets, and also the desire to provide their citizens with organic food.
Environment Committee chairย Giovanni La Viaย (EPP, IT) said:
โA clear majority in the committee does not want to jeopardize the internal market. For us, the existing legislation should remain in place, and member states should shoulder their responsibilities and take a decision together at EU level, instead of introducing national bans. This proposal conflicts with the principles of โbetter regulationโ and transparency which the new European Commission has taken on board. After we spent so many years getting rid of internal barriers, this proposal could fragment the internal market and lead to a return to border inspections, which we all worked hard to get rid of at the time.โ
The recommendation was approved by 47 votes to 3, with 5 abstentions. It should be noted that this is an amendment to existing legislation that allows member EU states to ban at will.
In its proposal, the Commission suggests that it should mirror, as regards genetically modified food and feed, the recent legislation in respect of GMOs intended for cultivation, which entered into force in early April 2015. It therefore proposes to allow member states to restrict or prohibit โ under certain conditions โ the use of genetically modified food and feed on their territory after these products have been authorized at EU level.
They are going to be in sorry state of living under the food tyranny.
Environment Committee chair Giovanni La Via demonstrates just what an unsafe joke centralize decision making is.
The EU was a obvious danger from the onset, they were warned.
The committee knows that gmos are our future, and realize that the real science says it is 100% safe.
Careful about using the term “real science”. There’s really just science, though there are examples of science done well and science done poorly.
Good point.
I see anti-GMO posts often use that term. I would hate to see it legitimized by showing up in posts defending the science behind genetic engineering.
โThe prospect of domination of the nationโs scholars by
Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever
present and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific
research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert
to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become
the captive of a scientific/technological elite.โ
Dwight Eisenhower
“Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts” โ Richard Feynman
“For we are opposed around the world by a
monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies on
covert means for expanding its sphere of
influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on
subversion instead of elections, on intimidation
instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night
instead of armies by day. It is a system which has
conscripted vast human and material resources into
the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient
machine that combines military, diplomatic,
intelligence, economic, scientific and political
operations.
President John F. Kennedy
Outside Independence Hall when
the Constitutional Convention of 1787 ended,
Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin,
“Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?”
With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded,
“A republic, if you can keep it.”
Well it is the oldest national constitution in the world right now.
Can try to tell me in your own words exactly what you think those quotes mean?
They are warnings.
Well that’s vague.
Actually, that’s to the point and in my own words.
Maybe you have some thoughts on what they mean that you would like to share?
I don’t have any comment on the quotes thanks. I’m not the one who posted them.
They are the end of our future if we surrender to the control of the bio techs with patents on every seed and intellectual property rights enforced to the last penny so get over it. We don’t care what the bio techs want. We don’t want GMO seeds, food nor anything from the bio techs.
Patents expire. Most seed companies were patenting their hybrids long before gmos, the only difference is that Monsanto actually asked the court to enforce theirs. If YOU don’t want gmos, then fine don’t buy them. There are organic and non gmo options available or do it yourself.
This will lead us back full circle to arguing with biased and bent EU commissioners who want this technology despite the vast majority of people in the EU who refuse to accept it.
It is irrelevant whether its safe or not. If the vast majority of the people do not want GMOs then that is that. Final. We do not want nor need to have GMOs in any form and we damned well won’t have them regardless of all the pro GMO biotech shills bleating about safety and need and advances in science and every other bullshit argument they spout as to why we must have GMOs. Its over. We don’t want them.
The government of the EU must accept it. As to whether we ban GMOs or accept them as an entire EU rather than this mishmash of bans and acceptances that exists today is an issue which we will now have another round of arguments and rules and amendments about.
I for one do not trust the science of the bio techs to prove its safe to eat this genetically modified crap so regardless as to whether its science or real science GMOs are still crap in my (scientific) opinion and that is a personal (scientifically based) fact. Trusting the biotech industry to police its own research is like trusting the fox with the chickens or the politicians with their own expenses accounts. Our best interests will never be served. They are all in it for their own profits and screw the ordinary people.
These are two different laws. The 19 countries banned growing of GMOs on their territories, which was easy, because they didn’t grow any GMOs anyway. However the new rules should concern the import and trade, which would be rather difficult to implement, since there are no border inspections. And EU imports about 70% of their feed requirements from Americas.