Addendum




Slovenia

(8 MEPs displayed)

Objection pursuant to Rule 106: draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean DAS-44406-6, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed
B8-0541/2017:


Franc
BOGOVIČ
 FOR (+) Glasoval sem za predlog resolucije, ker menim, da osnutek izvedbenega sklepa Komisije o odobritvi dajanja na trg proizvodov, ki vsebujejo gensko spremenjeno sojo DAS-44406-6, nima zadostne znanstvene podlage.
Prav tako se strinjam s poročevalcem, da izvedbeni sklep Komisije ni skladen s ciljem Uredbe (ES) št. 1829/2003, ki je podal podlago za zagotavljanje visoke ravni varovanja življenja in zdravja ljudi, zdravja in dobrobiti živali, okolja in interesov potrošnika v zvezi z gensko spremenjeno hrano in krmo, ob hkratnem zagotavljanju nemotenega delovanja notranjega trga.
Tanja
FAJON
 FOR
Alojz
PETERLE
 FOR
Romana
TOMC
 (absent)
Ivo
VAJGL
 FOR (+) I voted in favour of the objection pursuant to Rule 106. On 16 February 2012 Dow Agrosciences LLC and MS Technologies LLC submitted an application for the placing on the market of foods, food ingredients and feed containing, consisting of, or produced from genetically modified soybean DAS-44406-6 to the national competent authority of the Netherlands, in accordance with Articles 5 and 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003. On 17 February 2017 the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) adopted a favourable opinion in accordance with Articles 6 and 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003. Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 states that genetically modified food or feed must not have adverse effects on human health, animal health or the environment, and requires the Commission to take into account any relevant provisions of Union law and other legitimate factors relevant to the matter under consideration when drafting its decision. Many critical comments were submitted by Member States during the three-month consultation period. I voted in favour of the Objection because I believe that the draft Commission implementing decision is not consistent with Union law and that it is not compatible with the aim of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003.
Milan
ZVER
 FOR
Igor
ŠOLTES
 FOR
Patricija
ŠULIN
 AGAINST