EU puts off agreement on biotech rules despite threats of WTO action from Washington October 10 AP BRUSSELS, Belgium -- Divided over items from corn oil to pet food, European Union (news - web sites) governments have abandoned hopes of reaching agreement this month on stringent biotech rules despite fears of being hauled before the World Trade Organization by Washington. The delay means no movement can be made on lifting a 4-year-old EU moratorium on new genetically modified crops, EU officials and diplomats said Thursday. "Nothing will change," one diplomat said, while conceding that the WTO threat was a growing worry. U.S. officials have been increasingly strident in demanding that the EU lift the freeze, which they say costs U.S. corn growers alone some US$200 million a year in lost exports. Washington has support from the EU's executive body, which recommended lifting the ban last year but was stymied by six of the 15 EU governments: France, Italy, Denmark, Austria, Greece and Luxembourg. "We do consider there is no legal basis for the moratorium," said Pia Ahrenkilde, a European Commission spokeswoman. "It is a political problem." Public opinion in Europe runs high against genetically modified foods and crops, despite scientific evidence that they pose no new risk to humans or the environment. A string of health crises and food scares in Europe ranging from mad cow disease to dioxin-tainted chickens have undermined public trust in government safety assurances as well. The United States had hoped that EU agriculture and environment ministers, meeting separately next week in Luxembourg, would at least issue a "statement on moving forward," one U.S. official said on condition of anonymity. The ministers were scheduled to reach political agreement on regulations involving traceability and labeling of biotech organisms. The six refusing to lift the moratorium have said they would not do so until such rules are in place. But at a meeting Wednesday in Brussels, disagreements were so stark that ambassadors decided not to even try for an agreement next week, scheduling more discussion instead. For example, the British oppose labeling requirements for foods derived from biotech crops, such as highly processed corn oil, where the genetically altered material is no longer scientifically detectable. There's an enforceability problem there if you can't tell the difference," a British official said. "How can you prevent fraud?" Others want the rules to go further, for example, including meat and dairy products from animals that have been fed on genetically modified feed — a measure the Commission has called extreme and unworkable. France is even pushing to make sure labeling requirements extend to pet food. "It's a bit messy," another diplomat conceded. Despite "about 100" different compromise proposals, governments also have yet to reconcile differing positions over how much biotech material should be allowed to be present accidentally or unintentionally before a label is required. The Commission proposed 1 percent, but the European Parliament, backed by some countries, wants zero. U.S. producers consider even 1 percent unworkable, noting that Japan, which already has similar legislation, set a 5 percent threshold. While expressing disappointment that no decisions would be made next week, Ahrenkilde said the Commission hoped the discussion at least would move the EU toward a "more rational approach" to biotech foods. "At the moment there is no confidence and as a result there is no demand on the market in Europe," she said.