顾秀林转2015柏林宣言：不要转基因的欧洲，不要转基因的世界

　　顾秀林：转基因黑手党该疯狂了。转基因的伪科学泡沫和商业泡沫，不久就要可耻地破灭了。转基因的大趋势2014年就在下掉了，2015年看吧，这就快要跳崖啦——乌拉!

　　柏林宣言——“不要转基因的欧洲：机遇与挑战”大会 

　　2015年5月8日

　　http://www.gmo-free-europe.org/press.html

　　来自64个“不要转基因的地区”的参与者、转基因NGO网络、多瑙河大豆协会，2015年5月6-8日在柏林开会并发出“柏林宣言”。

　　参会者强调以下四项原则和目标：

　　1. 补贴和扶助农业，2. 实行预防性原则;3. 污染者全责赔偿原则，4.每一个人都有选择权。

　　参会者一致提出以下观点：

　　1. 自主决定退出

　　我们接受欧洲议会和欧盟委员会的协议：让成员国自行决定是否限制或者彻底禁止在它们国土上种植转基因植物。我们督促成员国在其国内和地方性立法中，最大限度地利用此一新的指导条款(new Directive (EU) 2015/412 )达到法律上的确定性。我们强调，贯彻上述新规定并不削弱欧盟在解决当前风险评估程序的不足中所具有的权威性，而采用了退出机制的成员国，也并不因此而削减在(欧盟范围相关事项上)的授权、影响和所负的责任。

　　2. 欧洲蛋白策略

　　欧盟进口相当于1200万公顷耕地出产的大豆、占需求量97%，已经危及欧洲食品供给独立性、造成出口国对土地的破坏性应用。欧洲不种植豆科作物实行轮作，已经对气候、土壤肥力、氮平衡和生物多样性产生巨大的负面后果。我们强烈要求欧盟议会和欧盟委员会：策划全面的欧洲蛋白策略以应对所有这些问题。 它应该有效地促进作为食品和饲料的非转基因油籽、蛋白和豆类作物在欧洲种植。这需要欧盟的共同农业政策对研发做出一致性规定。会员国应使用现有政策工具、投入充足的资金。

　　3. TTIP 环大西洋贸易伙伴协定

　　我们强烈要求欧盟在健康、环境、法律的明确性和民主的原则，不能因因TTIP或者任何其他自由贸易协定而降低。作为欧盟基本政策的参与原则不可损害。我们声明，TTIP不能限制欧盟以及成员国任何一项现行和将来制定的对安全性和标识所做的规定。

　　4. 对转基因的容忍度

　　非转基因产品和种子必须“零污染”。为此我们要求欧盟授权，不对食品和饲料的转基因污染度设“阈值”【即不允许任何水平的污染存在--译者注】。已经实施的种子转基因污染零容忍原则必须坚持。

　　5. 非转基因食品的标签制度

　　消费者购买食品时必须有一个关于转基因的完全透明的、完整的选择权，其中必须包括用转基因饲料喂养的动物及产品。 我们要求全欧洲像德国、法国、奥地利和卢森堡一样对动物产品做标识，在全欧洲的统一标识制度建立之前，先在各国内对非转基因饲料动物产品进行统一标识。欧盟成员国应该支持并参与起草一个国际性非转基因食品的标识标准，如Moravske Toplice首创的流程。

　　6. 关于新技术

　　基因改造新技术的应用应该坚持预防原则。作为在25年前尚无人知晓的新技术，欧洲必须采用同一个完整而透明的全欧洲通用程序，其不得被滥用于破坏目前欧盟的相关立法、安全标准及国际标准。

　　参会者来自以下国家: 阿尔巴尼亚、阿根廷、亚美尼亚、澳大利亚、奥地利、比利时、贝宁、波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那、巴西、保加利亚、加拿大、克罗地亚、捷克、厄瓜多尔、法国、冈比亚、格鲁吉亚、德国、加纳、希腊、匈牙利、印度、爱尔兰、意大利、日本、肯尼亚、科索沃、拉脱维亚、马拉维、马来西亚、马里、墨西哥、尼泊尔、荷兰、新西兰、尼日利亚、北爱尔兰、挪威、波兰、葡萄牙、马其顿共和国、罗马尼亚、俄罗斯、塞尔维亚、塞拉利昂、斯洛文尼亚、南非、西班牙、瑞典、瑞士、坦桑尼亚、多哥、土耳其、乌干达、英国、乌克兰、美国、乌兹别克斯坦、赞比亚

　　修订：贴出英文原文

　　BERLIN DECLARATION

　　Berlin, May 8, 2015 On the occasion of the Conference “GMO-free Europe - Future Opportunities and Challenges“ of the 64 GM-free Regions of

　　Europe, the GMO-NGO-Network and the Danube Soya Association from May 6 to 8, 2015

　　The participants emphasize the four guiding principles and objectives: • Subsidiarity Principle, • Precautionary Principle, • Polluter-pays-Principle,

　　• Freedom of choice for everybody and point out the following:

　　Opt Out

　　We accept the compromise reached by the European Parliament and the Council regarding the possibility for Member States to restrict or prohibit the

　　cultivation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) on their territory. We urge Member States to make the most effective use of this new Directive

　　(EU) 2015/412 within their national, and where appropriate, regional legislation and ensuring legal certainty of territorial bans on cultivation. We

　　emphasise that the adoption and implementation of Directive (EU) 2015/412 does not diminish the necessity to resolve shortcomings of the

　　authorisation and risk assessment procedure at the EU level in any way. Furthermore, making use of the opt-out option cannot reduce a Member

　　States’ influence and responsibility within the authorisation procedure.

　　European Protein Strategy

　　The European Union’s soya imports are equivalent to 12 million hectares of arable land and account for 97% of its demand. This jeopardizes the

　　independence of the EU food supply and causes destructive land use practices in exporting countries. The widespread absence of legumes from crop

　　rotations in Europe has huge negative consequences for our climate, soil fertility, nitrogen balance and biodiversity.

　　We demand that the EU Parliament and Commission develop a coherent European Protein Strategy to address all these issues. It should effectively

　　promote the sustainable production and use as food and feed of GMO-free oilseeds, protein crops and legumes in Europe. This requires research,

　　development efforts as well as coherent provisions of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy. Member states should use existing instruments of the CAP

　　and commit sufficient R&D funds to this end.

　　TTIP

　　We demand that EU standards on health, the environment, legal certainty and democracy must not be lowered by TTIP or any other free trade

　　agreements. The precautionary principle, as a fundamental principle of EU policies, must not be undermined. We point out that neither existing nor

　　future safety and labelling rules of the EU and its Member States may be restricted or prohibited by the TTIP or other free trade agreements.

　　Low Level Presence

　　GMO-free products and seed must remain GMO-free. We therefore demand that no thresholds are established for the contamination of food and feed

　　with GMOs not authorized within the EU. For seeds, not labelled as GMO, the current zero tolerance principle for GMO contamination must be

　　maintained.

　　Non-GMO-Labelling

　　Consumers must have a right to full transparency and choice on the use of GMOs in the food they buy. This must also include the use of GMO feed in

　　animal products. We are calling for a European wide harmonized approach to non-GMO-labelling on animal products. In the absence of such a

　　system we ask national governments to implement national labelling systems for animal products fed without GMOs, which already exist in Germany,

　　France, Austria and Luxembourg. Member states should support and participate in drafting an international GMO-free labelling standard, for example

　　the process initiated in Moravske Toplice.

　　New Technologies

　　The precautionary principle also should apply for new technologies of genetic modification. New technologies, not yet known when defining GMOs

　　about 25 years ago, have to be assessed in a common coherent and transparent EU-process and must not be abused to undermine the present EU

　　GMO legislation, safety and international standards.

　　www.gmo-free-europe.org