EU Consumer Lobbies Eclipse Indian Food Exporters? Drive

Indian exporters struggling to meet the sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) regulations in force in the European Union (EU) will blame the EU for its protectionist policies. But the real driving force behind EU import policies, especially when it comes to food, is the consumer and consumer protection lobbies.

This is obvious from the long-running debate in the 15-nation EU over genetically modified (GM) food and animal feed, viewed by some as ?Frankenstein foods.? The debate came to a head in one of the key EU institutions, the European Parliament, earlier this month, when the 626 MEPs voted on draft legislation which was first submitted to them some two years ago.

?The discussions have been intensive, complex and have often provoked strong emotional reactions,? the man in charge of consumer protection in the EU, David Byrne, declared at the end of the proceedings. He was quick to point out that the GM legislation, as approved by the European Parliament, ?will provide consumers with the freedom to choose between GM and non-GM products.?

But commissioner David Byrne also made clear just how irrational the public debate over GM food really is. ?All the scientific evidence available to us indicates that GM food is as safe as conventional food. There is no scientific evidence going in a contrary direction,? he told Parliament.

He was strongly supported by a socialist MEP, Robert Goebbels. Europe, he maintained, had rejected genetically modified varieties ?despite the total absence of health problems for consumers and damage to the environment.? He pointed out that numerous plant species, ?such as tobacco, wheat and rape, had been domesticated by man, over thousands of years, by the addition of different genomes.?

Mr Goebbels contrasted these random efforts with the targeted efforts of scientists, which was viewed ?as the work of the devil.? He noted that the international body, the Codex Alimentarius, had recognised that ?GM foodstuffs are no more dangerous than other foodstuffs.?

The tide is running strongly in favour of GM food; what is more, it is probably irreversible. For the MEP Robert Goebbels, ?since the 1980s, GM technology is progressing everywhere, except in Europe.? Last year some 60 million hectares were sown with GM crops across the globe, as compared to 10,000 or so hectares in the EU, for experimental purposes only. Meanwhile, 95% of Europeans with Ph.D degrees in biotechnology were working in the US.

The strongest opposition to EU policies on GM food and feedstuffs has come from the US, backed by countries such as Canada, Brazil and Australia. The Americans, in fact, have challenged in the WTO the ban on imports of GM food, in force in the EU since 1999, a ban which their chief trade negotiator claims has cost the US nearly $1 billion in lost exports.

The latest EU legislation, which will come into force shortly, will only add to costs for producers, whether in the EU or outside it. This is because the legislation provides for strict labelling, backed by traceability. The label will tell consumers of the presence of GM food, once it exceeds 0.9%. The presence of smaller quantities will be regarded as ?accidental.? The new legislation also provides for traceability, summed up in the slogan ?From farm to fork.? Detailed records will have to be kept, thus ensuring that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) can be traced at all stages in the production and marketing chain.

?In this way, we address the most critical concerns of the public regarding the environmental and health effects of GMOs,? according to David Byrne?s colleague, the EU?s environmental commissioner, Margaret Wallstrom. Not surprisingly, American farmers and food manufacturers are up in arms, and the Bush Administration can be expected to press its case for unfettered access to the EU market in WTO. But American farmers are not alone in wanting to plant GM crops. Many Asian countries, including China, Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines, see benefits in such crops, given that they do not require much water and are resistant to disease.

But international non-governmental organisations, such as ActionAid, believe that GM seeds cannot be a priority for farmers in developing countries. What poor farmers need, according to an ActionAid report, is ?land reform, access to water, better roads, so that they can get their produce to market, credit, and educational programmes.? Clearly, the debate on GM food is far from over, whether in the EU or India.