EU gene editing, pesticide cut proposals ‘package deal’, Commission warns

The European Commission’s upcoming gene editing proposal is ‘inseparable’ from its proposals to slash the use and risk of pesticides in half and to restore nature, Vice President Frans Timmermans said, stressing the proposals are not an ‘à la carte’ menu to pick and choose from.

The comments come on the back of the decision of the centre-right European People’s Party (EPP) to reject two crucial proposals under the Green Deal – the sustainable use of pesticides regulation (SUR) and the nature restoration law (NRL) – over food security concerns.

The contentious-but-ambitious SUR proposal aims to slash the use and risk of pesticides in half by 2030, as set out in the EU’s flagship food policy, the Farm to Fork strategy, while the NRL aims to restore the EU’s degraded ecosystems. Together, the two form foundational pillars of the political ambitions to restore Europe’s nature by 2050.

The move quickly prompted a counterattack from the Commission, with an official telling EURACTIV that a failure to approve these proposals would imperil that of another highly anticipated proposal on new genomic techniques (NGTs – see below for more details) – and it seems this is not an empty threat. 

“For all of you in this chamber, there is a choice to be made; stick to your trenches and stick to the status quo, which means no SUR and no NGTs, or reach out to each other and make progress happen together,” he told the European Parliament’s agriculture committee on Monday (22 May), calling on MEPs to put aside their differences and work together to move forward on the files. 

For Timmermans, the proposals already on the table and those set to come later on in June are “inseparable” given the Green Deal is a “package”. 

“It’s not an à la carte menu,” he said, stressing that there is “no such thing” as rejecting this proposal and hoping another one will come.

“The Commission will not come with another proposal, let that be crystal clear,” he said. 

For the Vice President, the adoption of the pesticides proposal will “prove that we are really serious about it and open the pathway to NGTs,” he said, stressing that “empty promises” of the past that bioinnovation will enable farmers to use less pesticides are “not enough” to win the public’s approval.

“The EU cannot be serious about food security unless we start fixing climate and nature together,” he concluded.

No to pesticide cuts? No gene editing proposal, Commission official warns

The EU executive could look to reconsider presenting its forthcoming gene editing proposal in the event of a European Parliament’s rejection of the EU’s plans to slash the risk and use of pesticides, a Commission official told EURACTIV.

Out of touch?

The remarks were met with consternation by many MEPs across the political spectrum in the room, who accused the Commission of being out of touch with the realities of farming on the ground and the current context in which they operate.

“Let’s look at where we are now,” socialist Clara Aguilera said, pointing to the fallout of the COVID pandemic followed in quick succession by the Ukraine war, which has pushed input prices up and farmers to the edge and brought inflation.

As such, all of these new rules lead to a “great deal of uncertainty”, she said.

Meanwhile, Renew’s Ulrike Müller accused EU institutions of operating in an “EU bubble far from reality”.

“As an active dairy farmer, I’m in contact with what farmers are doing [and] I can tell you the frustration of farmers has led to resignation and anger,” she said.

But Timmermans bit back against these accusations. 

“Who’s really in a bubble? Those ignoring the climate crisis or those that know it’s difficult but this doesn’t negate the very harsh facts?” he queried, stressing we “don’t have the luxury” of dismissing the crisis if we want to be ‘good ancestors’.

The notable exception was the Greens, who accused those against the proposals of “fanning up panic”. 

“If we want to protect farming, we must change something,” Green MEP Martin Häusling said, offering support for both the SUR and NRL proposals.

However, the MEP voiced reservations over the NGT proposal, warning this will not automatically link to a reduction in pesticide use and poses a threat to organic farming.

In doing so, Häusling demonstrated the split between camps within the Parliament; those in favour of NGTs, but not SUR and NRL, and vice versa. 

[Edited by Nathalie Weatherald]

Read more with Euractiv

MEP: EU must encourage ‘responsible’ use of new genetic techniques 

The EU must work towards regulation that enables the responsible use of new genomic techniques (NGTs) to innovate the farming sector while remaining centred around the precautionary principle, according to centre-right MEP Norbert Lins.