§ The Countess of Marasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether the appropriate advisory committees have seen the recent Chardon LL cattle feeding studies conducted for Bayer CropScience; and whether these studies confirm that Chardon LL maize silage is safe for cattle to eat. [HL2117]
§ Lord WhittyI understand that Bayer CropScience commissioned Reading University to undertake this cattle feeding study involving their GM maize T25 (Chardon LL) and that the researchers intend to submit the results of their study to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. The data will be assessed once the peer review process is complete and the appropriate advisory committees consulted as necessary.
Under the terms of Directive 2001/18, Bayer would have been required to notify the French competent authority, which issued the relevant consent on behalf of all EU member states, if this study had revealed any adverse effects on the cattle fed T25 forage. Both the researchers at Reading University and Bayer have confirmed that the study did not reveal any such adverse effects.
The Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs (ACAF) has advised, on the basis of the data already submitted, that it is content that the T25 maize grain and its products pose no more risk as animal feed than non-GM maize varieties. At present Bayer GM maize T25 cannot be grown in the UK for use as feed for livestock because it does not have all the necessary approvals for cultivation.
232WA
§ The Countess of Marasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will commission a repeat of the 1998–99 seed list trials for Chardon LL maize in view of the fact that the herbicide used in the trials is shortly to be withdrawn. [HL2119]
§ Lord WhittyThe herbicides used in trials to assess value for cultivation and use (VCU) follow best local practice at the time. All candidate and control varieties are treated in the same way in each trial, so that valid comparisons of variety performance can be made. It is therefore not necessary to repeat the trials when best local practice changes.
§ The Countess of Marasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether VCU Herbage Group asked that the specific GM characteristics of Chardon LL maize be assessed prior to the commencement of the national list trials; if so, why this request was refused; and by whom. [HL2120]
§ Lord WhittyThe remit of the Herbage VCU Group includes making recommendations on the assessment of any special characteristics claimed by national list applicants in respect of a variety's value for cultivation and use (VCU). In the case of Chardon LL the variety's resistance to the herbicide glufosinate ammonium was not claimed by the applicant to be a special characteristic for the purpose of the VCU trials and therefore did not need to be assessed.
§ The Countess of Marasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will give an assurance that no steps will be taken to facilitate the commercialisation of Chardon LL maize in the United Kingdom until a review of all of the studies available on the physiological impacts of feeding genetically modified materials to ruminants, such as cattle and sheep, has been conducted and published. [HL2153]
§ Lord WhittyChardon LL maize already has a Part C marketing consent for use as any other maize (this includes use as animal feed). This consent was issued in 1998 under Directive 90/220/EC following collective assessment by all EU member states.
The Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment (ACRE) and the Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs (ACAF) carried out a comprehensive review of the risks posed by the marketing and use of Bayer GM maize T25 (Chardon LL) in response to concerns raised in the Chardon LL public hearing on seed listing in December 2002. ACAF advised, on the basis of the data already submitted, that it is content that the T25 maize grain and its products pose no more risk as animal feed than non-GM maize varieties.
233WAIf new information becomes available, either from animal feeding studies or from any other source, which changes the assessment of the risks to human health or the environment then action can be taken under Directive 2001/18 (which replaced Directive 90/220) to restrict or suspend the release.