College of EU Commissioners European Commission Brussels, 1049

Brussels, 6 October 2014 Dear Commissioners,

We write to you on behalf of the European farmers’ organisations listed below and the Public Research and Regulation

Initiative (PRRI). The farmers’ organisations below have as main common goal that they seek freedom of farmers to

choose the crop varieties, including approved genetically modified (GM) varieties, they find best suited to address the

increasing and changing challenges in farming. PRRI is a world-wide organisation of public sector scientists active in

modern biotechnology for the common good. Our organisations are part of an European network of farmers and

scientists (FSN).

The European Union has the world’s most stringent regulatory system for assessing the safety of GM foods and feeds, with input from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and 28 Member State authorities, before a dossier is submitted to the Commission for a decision. Currently, eight GM crop varieties are awaiting the Commission’s final decision for authorisation as food and feed imports into the EU market. All eight GM crop varieties were assessed by EFSA to be as safe as their conventional counterparts, and subsequently underwent two rounds of votes each by the responsible committee of Member State representatives. Several of these GM crops are cultivated in countries that export commodities into the EU. Any postponement of their formal approval by the College of EU Commissioners could lead to import disruptions for soybeans, maize and various other protein-rich products from these regions. A number of Commission studies

1 have underlined that these kinds of

trade disruptions may considerably increase the price of livestock feed on the EU market, impacting negatively on the income of EU livestock farmers, who are already suffering significant economic losses due to the Russian ban on imports. Failing to authorise GM crops that fulfil the EU’s science-based risk assessment requirements will again confirm the wrong assumption that there must be something wrong with those GM crops, thereby weakening consumer confidence in GM crops themselves, the EU decision making process and depressing EU innovation and scientific research. Therefore we urge you to authorise the import of the pending eight GM products and to clearly provide a signal that the EU is still open to innovation and evidence-based decision making and supports the work and findings of the European Food Safety Authority.

1. AgroBiotechRom (AGBR, Romania, www.agrobiotechrom.ro) 2. Asociación Agraria Jóvenes Agricultores (ASAJA, Spain, www.asajanet.com) 3. Asociación Espanola de Productores de Vacuno de Carne (Asoprovac, Spain, www.asoprovac.com) 4. Asociación Nacional de Productores de Ganado Porcino (ANPROGAPOR, Spain) 5. Associazione Agricoltori FuturAgra (Italy, www.futuragra.it) 6. InnoPlanta (Germany, www.innoplanta.de) 7. Liga Asociatiilor Producatorilor Agricoli din Romania (LAPAR, Romania, www.lapar.org) 8. National Farmers Union (NFU, UK, www.nfuonline.com) 9. National Farmers Union Scotland ( NFUS, UK, http://www.nfus.org.uk/) 10. Public Research and Regulation Initiative (PRRI, www.prri.net)

1 Study on the Implications of Asynchronous GMO Approvals for EU Imports of Animal Feed Products (December 2010)

http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/external/asynchronous-gmo-approvals/ Economic Impact of Unapproved GMOs on EU Feed Imports and Livestock Production http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/envir/gmo/economic_impactGMOs_en.pdf