Viewpoints from the US
traceability regime in the EU. The NFPA argues that the regulations
represent a serious barrier to international trade, writes
Anthony Fletcher.
"These new requirements establish a serious trade barrier that will keep many US food products out of the European market," said John Cady, president of the National Food Processors Association (NFPA). "European consumers will see such labels on food products as `warning labels.' However, there is no safety or nutrition issue associated with the products of agricultural biotechnology on the market, and there is no scientific basis for requiring the labelling of biotech foods."
The NFPA, which is a major voice of the food processing industry on scientific and public policy in the US, has long opposed these labelling and traceability requirements by the EU. The body has been actively lobbying the World Trade Organisation to address this issue, and take action to block what it sees as unnecessary barriers to trade.
The new GM rules from Brussels - (EC) 1830/2003 on the Traceability and Labelling of GMOs and (EC) 1829/2003 on Genetically Modified (GM) Food and Feed - are stringent indeed, and reflect European consumer suspicions about food safety. Under the new rules, all foods which contain or consist of GMOs or which are produced from GMOs will have to be labelled regardless of the presence of GM material in the final product.
The EU claims that the rules have been set up to bring choice to the consumer - if they see 'GM ingredient' on the label they can decide to buy, or not. But the NFPA does not see it this way.
"Mandatory labelling should be based on the composition, intended use, and health and safety characteristics of a food product, not on the `genetic process' from which it was derived," said Cady. "Moreover, the traceability requirements are a classic case of regulatory overkill, putting complex and detailed new requirements on food companies, with no benefit - but with added expense - for consumers."
The NFPA's stance reflects a divergence in attitude between US and European consumers on the issue of GM crops - and food safety in general. Europeans have historically been far more sceptical about perceived risks, whereas Americans have tended to be far more accepting.
The buoyancy of the North American meat market is a good example. Despite the widely-reported outbreak of BSE, the popularity of meat has not dipped.
"I think we should give people more credit - people clearly have confidence in the food system," said Jim Long, meat analyst and CEO of genetics company Genesus. "It is certainly not the case that people are fearful of meat."
The situation is markedly different in Europe. Whereas Americans appear happy to accept government reassurances of food safety, consumers in Europe are far more sceptical. Health scares have hit meat consumption harder, according to the Central Statistics Office.
For example, pig slaughterings decreased by 4.1 per cent or 10,000 tonnes last year compared to the previous year, while poultry meat imports decreased by 5.1 per cent to 37,000 tonnes.
But some see a narrowing of the gap between European and US consumers on the issue of food safety, and GM crops in particular. Bernard Marintelli from the Agricultural Biotechnology Council (ABC), believes that this is happening for two reasons.
"If you look at surveys in the US, there has been a small increase in the number of people that have concerns over GMOs, primarily due to the negative coverage of the issue from Europe. This means that from virtually no opposition, there now exists low opposition to GM foods." He contrasts this with what is happening in Europe.
"In 1997 to 1998, GM was not a public issue - hardly anyone had heard of it," he says. "We then went through the eye of the storm in 1999 to 2000 where there was a large amount of opposition. But if you look at recent surveys, there is now a small core in favour, a small core opposed and a large chunk in the middle driven by issues of taste and price rather than safety."
US biotech companies have some reason for optimism, however. The new rules on GM labelling could open the way for an ultimate end to the ban and the introduction of new GM food crops into the European food chain. Under the new rules, a threshold of 0.9 per cent will apply for the accidental presence of GM material, below which labelling of food or feed is not required.
