The European Parliament’s Agriculture Committee (AGRI) voted on Tuesday (19 March) to loosen rules on marketing seeds and plant reproductive material for conservation purposes and informal exchanges between farmers.
The draft regulation, initially presented by the European Commission last July, seeks to standardise existing EU legislation and will replace the ten directives that currently lay down rules for the production and marketing of seeds, cuttings, young plants, and other types of Plan Reproductive Material (PRM).
Italian MEP Herbert Dorfmann, the coordinator of the European People’s Party (EPP) in AGRI, spearheaded the proposed changes, which maintain the core elements of the Commission’s text while relaxing rules for conservation varieties — traditional crops adapted to local conditions at risk of being displaced by modern varieties.
The amendments endorsed by agriculture MEPs exempt the access, sale, and transfer of conservation varieties in small quantities from the rules and extend the registration period for such varieties to 30 years.
Organisations involved in plant gene conservation, such as seed banks, staunchly opposed the Commission’s original proposal as their activities would be tightly regulated by the new rules, limiting seed transfers and increasing bureaucratic hurdles and costs.
Speaking to Euractiv, Dorfmann described the position backed by AGRI as “balanced,” stressing that it will bring certainty to the seed industry while cutting red tape for conservation purposes, and unifying legislation across EU countries.
This stance was praised by private seed bank Arche Noah, which said it was a significant improvement on the Commission’s proposal. The organisation hopes that conservation organisations will be able to distribute small amounts of seeds to farmers and hobby gardeners in the future.
“The Agriculture Committee has set clear and, in our view, very positive guidelines for further parliamentary work: diversity must be excluded from the scope of the new seed law and consistently promoted,” said Magdalena Prieler, a seed law expert at Arche Noah.
Seed exchanges
Additionally, agriculture lawmakers voted to allow farmers to exchange seeds and other PRM informally for agricultural production with some restrictions.
The initial Commission proposal defined any transfer of plant reproductive material, even free-of-cost deals, as marketing, a provision strongly criticised by Arche Noah and European Coordination Via Campesina (ECVC), which represents peasants and small-scale farmers.
They argued that these restrictions violate farmers’ rights, enshrined in the 2018 United Nations (UN) Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas.
“Important modifications have been adopted to improve the definition of marketing and the scope of the regulation and to support a stronger framework for peasants’ rights to exchange PRM from their harvest,” ECVC told Euractiv in a statement.
However, Arche Noah emphasised that concerns persist regarding patents for plants produced through conventional breeding methods, as the amendments to curb these practices did not reach a majority.
Similarly, the ECVC reaffirmed its opposition to patenting gene-edited crops, cautioning that this could prompt farmers to lose their right to re-use seeds from harvest.
Industry slams AGRI’s position
The seed industry, represented by Euroseeds, expressed serious reservations about AGRI’s amendments, fearing negative impacts on plant breeders, seed producers, and farmers.
“The report finally adopted today is seen as a step back for the common market for PRM that puts seed quality, plant health, customer information, and official oversight for all seed and all suppliers and users at risk,” Euroseeds said in a press release.
Garlich von Essen, Euroseeds secretary-general, praised the original Commission proposal for “striking a balance” between “seed security and seed diversity” but regretted that this had been lost with the “broad exemptions” granted by the report.
The organisation urged the Parliament to develop “alternative proposals” before the final vote in April’s plenary session, as they consider the current approach “unacceptable” for Europe’s seed sector.
[Edited by Angelo Di Mambro and Zoran Radosavljevic]
Source: Euractiv.com
Leave a comment