News

European Elections 2024: Who wants to preserve genetic engineering rules, who wants to abolish them?

05/30/2024 - The result of the European Elections on 9 June 2024 will also have an impact on the EU's future genetic engineering regulations. In Bavaria, this is even an election campaign issue. What is the position of the various German political parties?

The 2024 European elections will be held in the middle of the ongoing legislative process for possible new rules on genetic engineering in agriculture and the food industry in the EU. The ‘old’ Parliament has already largely spoken out in favour of the EU Commission's deregulation proposal.

However, the Member States must also reach an agreement. Another attempt to do so by the current Belgian EU Council Presidency has just been thwarted shortly before the elections. A solution is not in sight, so the issue will continue to occupy the new European Parliament. Almost all parties have taken a stand on the issue in their European election manifestos and in surveys, to varying degrees and with varying clarity.

CDU-CSU: Genetic engineering largely omitted from the manifesto

In the joint CDU-CSU manifesto, the topic of genetic engineering is largely omitted; the term does not appear at all. There is only a brief mention under the coded description ‘new breeding technologies’: ‘We want a strong impetus for precision agriculture, new breeding technologies, integrated pest management and the use of robotics in agriculture.’

This reluctance on the part of the CDU-CSU, which is clearly in first place in the polls for the European elections, could also be related to the fact that, in Bavaria, the ÖDP is using the issue in its election campaign. It addresses the ambivalent attitude of the CSU, present in Bavaria only, which on the one hand campaigns for a GMO-free Bavaria, but on the other hand supports deregulation in the European Parliament.

In an election touchstone issued by the organic farming association Biokreis, the CDU-CSU expressed its support of deregulation more clearly and with slight reservations: ‘The new breeding technologies call for a new legal framework. Varieties that could also be created in the same form through conventional breeding should no longer fall under the regulations of genetic engineering law. However, transparency and traceability should be guaranteed’.

Greens: Protect GMO-free production and freedom of choice

In their European manifesto, the Greens commit themselves to the ‘model of organic farming’, one of the principles of which is freedom from genetic engineering: ‘As with any technology, the political compass for dealing with old and new genetic engineering methods must ensure freedom of research on the one hand and, in their application, exclude risks to humans and the environment on the other. New genetic engineering methods in agriculture should also be explored with regard to their opportunities, risks and consequences. For sustainable and transparent agriculture, it is essential that farms that want to operate GMO-free can do so securely.’

It is important to adhere to a ‘strict approval procedure’ and to the precautionary principle. ‘This requires risk assessments on a comprehensive scientific basis and regulations that rule out uncontrollable spread and protect GMO-free production as well as consumer freedom of choice through mandatory labelling. We reject patents on plants and animals. In doing so, we are safeguarding the future of small and medium-sized agricultural and breeding businesses in particular.’

SPD: Precautionary principle, risk assessment, freedom of choice and labelling

According to its manifesto, the SPD rejects ‘genetic engineering in the conventional sense’. The use of ‘new genomic techniques (CRISPR/Cas, “gene scissors”)’ will be examined unbiased: ‘Our top priority are the precautionary principle and the associated comprehensive risk assessment in individual cases before any potential authorisation. After all, new genetic engineering techniques can also have undesirable effects. Consumers who do not want genetically modified plants on their plates need freedom of choice. If new genetic engineering is approved, the traceability and labelling of products made with genetically modified plants is therefore indispensable.’

BSW: ‘Rejection of agro-genetic engineering’

The ‘Sarah Wagenknecht Alliance’ (BSW) is ahead of the FDP and the Left Party in current polls. The new party has a very concise 20-page European election manifesto. Nevertheless, the topic of genetic engineering is mentioned. Also very briefly and without reference to the current debate on new genetic engineering, it states: ‘Rejection of agricultural engineering, no patents on life, free reproduction of seeds’

FDP: Clear commitment to the deregulation of genetic engineering

The liberal FDP, on the other hand, is clearly in favour of deregulating old and new genetic engineering in its manifesto: ‘We want to enable innovations in agriculture, such as genetic engineering, through rapid and scientifically sound approval procedures,’ it says. ‘We are committed to a complete reorganisation of European genetic engineering regulations. Not only must the assessment of traditional green genetic engineering be adapted to the current state of knowledge, but so-called new breeding techniques, such as genome editing by Crisp/Cas9, must also be regulated in a progress-orientated and legally clear manner.’ The FDP also wants to authorise in-vitro meat and milk produced using microorganisms in the EU. ‘Biotechnology and genetic engineering’ should be a focus of EU research funding.

Die Linke (The Left): Prioritising the precautionary principle over the innovation principle

‘80 percent of the population reject genetic engineering on their plates,’ states the Left Party Die Linke in its European manifesto. ‘We reject the cultivation of transgenic plants in agriculture, including so-called new genomic techniques, and patents on seeds, plants, animals and other life. They jeopardise biodiversity and increase the dependence of producers on overpowering global market players’. The party is against the deregulation of new genetic engineering: ‘The EU's planned suspension of general labelling for the majority of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) must be prevented. Otherwise, consumers will no longer have a choice. The precautionary principle must once again take precedence over the innovation principle.’

Voters can therefore factor the parties' positions on genetic engineering into their election decision on 9 June 2024. It remains to be seen how the future European Parliament will react to this issue. One thing seems certain: this debate is far from over.

CDU-CSU: Europe with certainty. CDU and CSU election manifesto for the 2024 European elections (in German)

Greens: What protects us - European election manifesto 2024 (in German)

SPD: Together for a strong Europe (in German)

BSW: Manifesto for the 2024 European elections (in German)

FDP: Europe. Simply. Make it. The FDP manifesto for the 2024 European elections (in German)

Die Linke: Time for justice. Time for attitude. Time for peace. Manifesto for the 2024 European elections (in German)

European elections: What do parties say about agrotechnology? (Infodienst Gentechnik) (in German)

New genetic engineering: Belgians fail with compromise proposal (Infodienst Gentechnik) (in German)

ÖDP wants to stop genetic engineering (Fränkischer Tag) (in German)

Election touchstone for the European elections: Deregulation of new genetic engineering (Biokreis) (in German)

European elections 2024: Where the parties stand on organic, CAP & NGT (Bioland) (in German)

Ranking: Parties in favour of regulating new genetic engineering (BUND) (in German)