Recombinant DNA insertion into plant retrotransposons.

It is clear that antibiotic marker genes need to be phased out and be replaced with alternatives as soon as practically possible. A phase-out is already foreseen in the common position. The commission agrees to strengthen this political message’. Yet she further compounded the belief that the EU are attempting a biopolitical compromise by simultaneously operating a public attitude agenda and a scientific agenda when she added, ‘At the moment, there is no scientific evidence that all GMOs of this type (ie. containing antibiotic resistance marker genes) present adverse effects to human health and the environment. Instead we should continue to carry out a comprehensive case-by-case risk analysis’. The Parliament was also divided on some key amendments. It voted through 29 of the 52 proposed amendments to the common position on the proposals. It was decided that the year 2005 should be the definite date for the phasing out of GMOs that contain antibiotic resistance marker genes rather than simply phasing them out ‘progressively’. However, the amendments that would have banned such GMOs immediately were rejected. On the topic of legal liability for the release of GMOs, the Parliament rejected the proposal that the party legally responsible for a deliberate release be bearers of the cost of any damage caused. However, the Commissioner did assure to do her utmost to present a proposal for legislation on liability before the end of 2001. She also drew attention to the fact that the Commission has adopted a ‘white paper’ on environment liability that included particular reference to GMOs. The Commission holds the opinion that, in general, a horizontal approach is the most efficient way of guaranteeing a comprehensive responsibility regime for environmental damage. It is interesting to note that the Commission indicated that it would reject outright a total of 16 amendments, which the Parliament had voted to adopt. The amended common position will now proceed to further discussions with the Council of Ministers and the Commission, where the position of Parliament will be addressed. When this occurs, agreed amendments will be applied to the regulations. Alternatively, if disagreement between the pillars of the EU still remains, the process will enter a 6–8 month conciliation procedure.