I have a lot of sympathy for ‘do we need it’ as a regulatory trigger. Struggled with it myself when we looked into the regulation of nanotechnology. As a trade lawyer, the immediate concern that comes to mind is whether ‘perceived or proven need’ (or perceived or proven absence of need) would be acceptable in like product analysis, especially when the products conversely proven /perceived to be needed, are domestic. Great piece. Geert.
EU Perspectives investigates.
The decision to approve Pioneer 1507 rests no longer with the Member States or the Parliament. It now rests with the European Commission who have been ordered to make a decision one way or the other by the European Court of Justice. The European Commission has been trying to pass the buck on this one for over ten long years hoping that the problem will simply evaporate. And, who can blame them.
The debate surrounding GMO products is as divisive as it is polarised. Supporters of GMO products are quick to provide a host of scientific studies to justify the existence of food produced in a lab. Six from the EFSA
View original post 478 more words