Proposed new EU laws on GM foods can only empower the consumer
People tend to be either in favour or opposed.
Trying to devise laws to govern GM food is fraught with problems.
This was very obvious during yesterday's lengthy debate in the European Parliament in Strasbourg, where two pieces of legislation on GM foods are to be voted on today.
The first aims to tighten the labelling of GM foods, while the second tries to provide rules for the growing of GM and non-GM crops where there is a fear of contamination.
The EU is under huge pressure to get this legislation through and put GM food on the supermarket shelves.
Most of the pressure comes from the industry which has invested billions of euro in developing the foods, labelled by some as Frankenstein foodstuffs, and others as wonder foods.
The US has complained to the World Trade Organisation about the effective ban on GM foods in Europe, and a ruling is expected, possibly next spring, against the EU.
The latest to enter the fray has been President George W Bush, with his contentious statement that Europe's reluctance over GM is starving Africa.
Americans have been eating GM food for years, usually unaware that they are doing so. Much of their maize and soya crops are now GM, normally mixed with non-GM ingredients.
However, because of various citizen and environmental groups, awareness about the issue is much higher in Europe.
According to a Euro poll last year, 70% of EU citizens do not want GM foods, while 94% say they want to be able to choose.
The first group, like many of the parliamentarians in Strasbourg yesterday, do not seem to be aware of the ongoing battle over GM.
GM is here to stay unless consumers in Europe vote with their shopping trolleys and refuse to buy.
The good news is that they should soon be able to choose, because the new legislation insists that GM ingredients must be listed.
However, as environmental organisations point out, there is a limit to this choice too.
The European Commissioner partly responsible for the new legislation, David Byrne, is proposing that ingredients be labelled only where they make up more than 1% of the total.
However, MEPs have been pushing to reduce this, and it is likely to be set at 0.9%, even though tests can trace as little as 0.1% of GM in a product.
MEPs are also insisting that the legislation include not just food for humans but also animal feed.
The new laws will also insist that all GM ingredients must be traceable back to their original sources.
There has been an effective ban on GM foods since 1999, when EU countries decided that until there was full testing, labelling and traceability, they would not allow new products onto the market.
However this is not to say that there are no GM foods in the EU and that consumers are not eating them: some 35 million tonnes of GM soya are consumed annually, for example.
Yesterday, Commissioner Byrne warned that the Commission will take action against member states if they do not permit GM foods on the shelves once the new legislation is in place.
Environment Commissioner Margot Walstrom reminded people that the debate on the existence of GM foods is over. GM is here to stay, and the best the EU can do is ensure that it is safe.
Although many argue that it is too soon to be sure GM foods are safe, Commissioner Byrne said there is no scientific evidence that they are not.
All the EU can really do is let people know what is GM and what is not, and let them decide for themselves.
