The European Parliament plenary on 17 June 2026 adopted the report by Jessica Polfjärd (EPP) on new genomic techniques (NGTs) in agriculture, rejecting all amendments. Polfjärd urged rejection of changes, arguing NGTs provide tools for climate resilience and food security. Christophe Clergeau (S&D) opposed, warning of patents and control by multinationals like Bayer. Silvia Sardone (PfE) backed NGTs as distinct from GMOs, accusing 'environmental Taliban' of misinformation. Pietro Fiocchi (ECR) supported NGTs for reducing pesticides and water use. Pascal Canfin (Renew) endorsed a 'European model' for NGTs, improving on the Commission proposal. Martin Häusling (Greens-EFA) and Anja Hazekamp (The Left) opposed, citing lack of labeling, traceability, and patent bans, with Hazekamp calling it a 'direct result of aggressive lobbying.' Anja Arndt (NI) demanded mandatory labeling and patent exclusion. All amendments were rejected, and the legislative act was adopted. The Parliament also adopted the return regulation provisional agreement (amendment 4), the EU-Pakistan tariff agreement, and the termination of the EU-Liberia forest agreement. The debate exposed a divide between proponents who see NGTs as a climate-smart innovation and opponents who fear corporate control and lack of consumer transparency. For farmers and seed producers, adoption could mean access to drought-resistant varieties but also potential dependency on patented seeds. Biotech firms stand to gain from a clearer regulatory path, while the organic sector and consumer groups face risks of cross-contamination and reduced choice without mandatory labeling. The outcome strengthens the Commission's proposal, though the file now moves to Council for final approval.
EU Matrix analysis