Skip to content
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION (D069148/02 – 2020/2894(RSP))

On the draft Commission implementing decision renewing the authorisation for the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of or produced from genetically modified maize MON 88017 (MON-88Ø17-3) pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council

B-9-2020-0415

Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety · Rapporteur: Tilly Metz Günther Sidl, Anja Hazekamp, Eleonora Evi, Sirpa Pietikäinen

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX
✦ In shortFull text
✦ In short · AI summary of this text, generated 25 Sept 2026

Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.

Parliament objects to the draft Commission implementing decision renewing the authorisation of genetically modified maize MON 88017 for food and feed. It says the draft exceeds the Commission's implementing powers and is not consistent with Union law, and calls on the Commission to withdraw it. It cites Member State criticism of the European Food Safety Authority opinions, gaps in the risk assessment of Bt toxins, glyphosate residues and non-target effects, and the lack of a qualified majority of Member States in favour. It asks the Commission to stop authorising genetically modified organisms when Member States deliver no opinion, to develop sustainability criteria, and to respect international agreements. It asks the European Food Safety Authority to widen its risk assessment and require tests on plant tissue.

Key points

  1. Parliament considers that the draft Commission implementing decision exceeds the implementing powers provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003.
  2. It considers the draft not consistent with Union law, because it is not compatible with the aim of ensuring a high level of protection of human and animal health and the environment.
  3. It calls on the Commission to withdraw its draft implementing decision.
  4. It welcomes the Commission's recognition of the need to take sustainability into account, but expresses strong disappointment that another genetically modified soybean was authorised despite Parliament's objection.
  5. It calls on the Commission to move forward urgently on sustainability criteria with full involvement of Parliament, and to say how and by when.
  6. It urges the Commission to take into account the Union's obligations under the Paris Climate Agreement, the UN Convention on Biological Diversity and the UN Sustainable Development Goals.
  7. It reiterates its call on the Commission to stop authorising genetically modified organisms when Member States deliver no opinion in the Appeal Committee.
  8. It reiterates its call not to authorise herbicide-tolerant genetically modified crops until health risks from residues are fully investigated case by case, including break-down products and combinatorial effects.
  9. It calls on the European Food Safety Authority to accept the differences between native Bt toxins and those expressed by synthetic transgenes and to widen its risk assessment to all interactions and combinatorial effects.
  10. It calls on the European Food Safety Authority to no longer accept toxicity studies based on isolated proteins and to require all tests to be carried out with tissue from the genetically modified plant.
  11. It calls on the European Food Safety Authority to ensure field trial or greenhouse data cover a sufficiently broad range of agronomic and environmental conditions and of different varieties.
  12. It calls on the European Food Safety Authority to request data on the impact on the intestinal microbiome of consuming food and feed derived from genetically modified plants.

Who is affected

  • The Commission: asked to withdraw the draft decision, stop authorising GMOs without Member State support, and develop sustainability criteria.
  • The European Food Safety Authority: asked to widen its risk assessment, reject isolated-protein studies and require plant-tissue tests.
  • Member States: their critical comments on the EFSA opinions and their vote delivering no opinion are cited.
  • The authorisation holder Monsanto: its application for renewal and its studies are cited.

Figures and deadlines

  • 26 October 2020: vote of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health at which no opinion was delivered.
  • 10 July 2018: date Monsanto submitted the renewal application to the Commission.
  • 21 April 2009: date EFSA adopted a favourable opinion on the initial authorisation, published on 6 May 2009.
  • 29 January 2020: date EFSA adopted a favourable opinion on the renewal, published on 11 March 2020.
  • up to 20-fold: enhancement of insecticidal activity of Bt toxins by low levels of proteinase inhibitors in a 1990 study.
  • 39 peer-reviewed publications: reports of significant adverse effects of Bt toxins on out-of-range species.
  • three to five years: period in which the US Environmental Protection Agency proposes to phase out many Bt corn hybrids and some Bt cotton varieties.
  • 36 resolutions: objections to GMOs adopted by Parliament in its eighth term; eleven objections in its ninth term.