8 Amendments of Lynn BOYLAN related to 2015/0093(COD)
Amendment 20 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The use of genetic engineering in plants and in food and feed is a subject which divides opinion in the Member States and this is reflected in the decision-making process leading to the authorisation of GMOs and GM food and feed. Since the date of application of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, the results of the voting in the committees or in Council show that there has never been a qualified majority either in favour of or against the authorisation of those products. Therefore, authorisations have been adopted by the Commission at the end of the procedure, in accordance with applicable legislation, without the support of the Member States' committee opinion. This has led to a democratic deficit which the then-candidate for President, Jean-Claude Juncker, committed himself to solve, pledging to democratise the authorisation procedure.
Amendment 23 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Once a GMO or a GM food and feed is authorised in accordance with Directive 2001/18/EC or Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, the Member States may not prohibit, restrict or impede the free circulation of that product within their territory, except for its placing on the market and in accordance with strict conditions which are laid down by Union law –and require to provide evidence of a severe risk to health or to the environment. Some Member States have had recourse to the safeguard clauses and the emergency measures provided for respectively in Articles 23 of Directive 2001/18/EC and Article 34 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003. Other Member States have made use of the notification procedure provided for in Article 114(5) and (6) of TFUE which also is required to be based on new scientific evidence relating to the protection of the environment or the working environment. Other Member States have adopted unilateral prohibitions. Some of these measures have been challenged before national jurisdictions or the Court of justice.
Amendment 26 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) That situation was changed recently as regards GMOs for cultivation due to the adoption, on 13 March 2015, of Directive (EU) 2015/41214 which amended Directive 2001/18/EC to allow Member States to restrict or prohibit the cultivation of GMOs in their territory. The new provisions are primarily aimed at enabling Member States to decide whether or not they wish to permit the cultivation of GMO crops on their territory, without affecting the risk assessment provided in the system of Union authorisations of GMOs. They were intended to provide more predictability to operators and limit the recourse by the Member States to the safeguard clauses provided for in Article 23 of Directive 2001/18/EC and 34 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003. It was also expected that those amendments would have a positive impact on the decision- making process for the authorisation of GMOs for cultivation. __________________ 14 Directive (EU) 2015/412 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2015 amending Directive 2001/18/EC as regards the possibility for the Member States to restrict or prohibit the cultivation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in their territory (OJ L 68, 13.3.2015, p. 1).
Amendment 32 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Member States should therefore be allowed to adopt measures restricting or prohibiting the useplacing on the market in all or part of their territory of a GMO or a GM food and feed, or group of GMOs or of GM food and feed, once authorised, provided that such measures are reasoned, based on compelling grounds in accordance with Union law, and are in line with the principles of proportionality and non- discrimination between national and non- national products, and Article 34, Article 36 and Article 216(2) of TFEU.
Amendment 35 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The restrictions or prohibitions adopted pursuant to this Regulation should refer to the useplacing on the market and not to the free circulation and imports of genetically modified food and feed.
Amendment 38 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The level of protection of human and animal health and of the environment achieved through the authorisation procedure provided for by Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 requires a uniform scientific assessment throughout the Union and this Regulation should not alter that situation. Therefore to avoid any interference with the competences which are granted to the risk assessors and risk managers under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003,which, in line with the Council Conclusions on GMOs adopted by the Environment Council on 4 December 2008 must be reformed to improve the quality of the procedure. Until then Member States should not be authorisbe permitted to use grounds which are related to risks to health and to the environment which should be dealt with in accordance with the procedure, especially when they already establish acting based ion Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, and in particular its Articles 10, 22 and 34the concerns of civil society in their country.
Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In the case where a product was lawfully usedplaced on the market before a Member State adopts measures pursuant to this Regulation, sufficient time should be given to operators to allow the phasing out of the product from the market.
Amendment 49 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1
Article 1
Regulation (EC) No 1829/2002
Article 34a – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 34a – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States may adopt measures restricting or prohibiting the useplacing on the market of products referred to in Article 3(1) and 15(1) authorised pursuant to this Regulation provided that such measures are: