Transatlantic Trade Agreement Raises Food Safety and Labeling Concerns in EU

03 Mar 2015 --- The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) agreement between the US and the EU is coming to the closing stages of negotiations, but it has left many in the food industry around Europe worried. Concerns about food safety, imports of incorrectly labelled GMOs, and threats to protected food terms are all high on the agenda with opponents.

After two years of talks, what could be the biggest trade deal of all time, between the world’s biggest trade partners, will not just reduce tariffs, but also aims to remove regulatory barriers so that companies can do business more easily.

For European food manufacturing and the wider food market, opponents are worried that the deal will lead to a mass US influx of food that is below EU standards, and safety, causing potential harm to animals and the general public.

An analysis of what is being dubbed the Trojan Treaty by many was carried out by Friends of the Earth Europe, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, Compassion in World Farming, Center for Food Safety and GRAIN. Their analysis indicates that the trade deal (TTIP) will threaten public health, consumer rights and animal welfare standards. They raise concerns that trade interests will be put before food safety in TTIP.

Analysis of the draft published by the EU raises a number of concerns about the impact on food safety and animal welfare. These include: the priority given to maximizing trade, the shift of power from national governments to a new trade committee, the threat to the ability of local authorities to set higher standards, the risk of minimal health and safety checks for novel foods (including GMOs, cloned animals, and nano materials), non-binding provisions for animal welfare, and the required adoption of international food standards established through the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

Decisions on food safety would be shifted to this a trade committee and away from national and European decision-makers, while also reducing countries’ rights to inspect food and agricultural imports at the port of entry – a key measure used to safeguard public health. “People in many states are rebuilding their food systems from the ground up. The proposals in the SPS chapter could create new obstacles to cut that process short” Karen Hansen-Kuhn, Director of Internal Strategies at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, explained.

Another big concern has been the possibility of genetically modified crops on the menu in Europe. In January European Agriculture Commissioner Phil Hogan sought to dispel fears over GMO labelling on products entering the EU. He said that he would remain firm on consumer protection in regards GMO labelling.

Regardless, concerns over the risk of consuming genetically modified products remain high. Critics see a further trade agreement with Canada (CETA) as a threat to the GMO ban.

The Bundestag’s Green Party faction voiced its concerns in an assessment of CETA entitled 'Free trade - gateway for agricultural genetic engineering'. The study analyses the possible consequences of TTIP based on the CETA text.

It concludes that with TTIP: “EU standards for the protection of GMO-free agriculture, such as measures against contamination and maintaining clean seed, will be lowered in the medium-term.” The author also predicts changes in the approval procedure for imported products.

Hogan also sought to reassure consumers on the purpose of designated regional status for many European food product, such as Melton Mowbray Pork Pies or Roquefort cheese. He said that all the regional designations would remain and that TTIP does not pose a threat to any of the products.

“Our system of protected regional indications will not change,” Hogan explained. TTIP is not a threat, the Commissioner said, but rather an opportunity for producers of regional specialities.