www.checkbiotech.org ; www.raupp.info ; www.czu.cz

The European Food Safety Authority has fought back against criticism of its
GM risk assessment methods and rejected accusations that it is biased
towards the biotech industry, May 2006.

Acting executive director Dr Herman Koëter said that much of the criticism
was down to a ?misunderstanding of EFSA?s role?.

The Parma-based authority had come under fire from both Brussels and EU
member states over the reliability of its GM crop risk assessments.

National capitals, particularly those opposed to GM crops, have also
attacked the authority for ignoring their unease over the long term effects
of GM crops.

In response, Koëter said, EFSA met with member states? representatives on
Monday to iron out differences and to strengthen cooperation in GM risk
assessments.

?We learned a lot today, we had a fruitful exchange of views,? Koëter told
journalists at a press conference.

?Obviously member states would appreciate closer involvement with EFSA.?

But said Koëter, it appeared that it was not common knowledge that ?we
already work closely with member states?.

He reiterated EFSA?s role saying its task was limited to providing
science-based evidence on GM, not to approve the introduction of GM crops,
but accepted that the GM issue was inherently political.

?There is political pressure on us, but [risk assessments] have to be dealt
with scientifically.?

The chair of EFSA?s GMO panel, Dr Harry Kuiper, rebuked any suggestion of
biotech industry bias.

Kuiper said that two important issues, the long term aspects of GM crops and
?uncertainty?, were raised by member states during Monday?s meeting.

?The heart of any assessment is focused on the long term aspects and
uncertainty. They are essential aspects of risk assessment procedures.?

Kuiper accepted that assessments were based on data supplied by the
companies putting forward the GM application, ?but we look very critically
at the information supplied. The quality of methods used is a key issue,? he
said

Koëter said that he was happy to open up the risk assessments to national
scrutiny.

?It?s more work, but we are happy to explain how a panel comes to its
conclusions. It?s important that everyone is happy with the risk
assessments.?

Koëter promised that EFSA would start building up a network with experts in
member states, but warned that countries that take a more political view
should not mask their views with quasi-scientific arguments.

?Unfortunately, politics creeps into science ? it?s unavoidable.?

And Koëter rounded on the science behind GM coexistence, a policy vigorously
pursued by staunch anti-GM member states including current EU presidency
holders, Austria.

?The coexistence question has not been addressed by EFSA. It?s essentially
an economic issue, not a scientific one.?

?We would not shy away from addressing a scientific assessment of
coexistence.?


[www.eupolitix.com]

------------------------------------------
Posted to Phorum via PhorumMail