Tech | December 30, 2010 | 10 comments

Canadian parliament debating negative economic impact of GM crops-Bill C-474

source: http://www.commonground.ca/iss/234/cg234_billC474.shtml

Image
JanforGore
*NDP secures extended debate on GE crops in January

For the first time, Parliament is engaged in a real debate over the negative impacts of genetically engineered (GE) food and crops (also known as genetically modified, GM). This debate is thanks to the one-line Private Members Bill C-474, which would require “an analysis of potential harm to export markets be conducted before the sale of any new genetically engineered seed is permitted.”

Despite industry attempts to prevent the debate from happening in the first place and a successful move to shut down Agriculture Committee hearings on the Bill, Bill C-474 continues to force more debate in both the House of Commons and the Agriculture Committee.

The Bill identifies the core problem of GE crops being approved in Canada despite predicted negative economic impacts. GE contamination translates into economic costs borne by farmers, especially when GE crops are introduced without also being approved in our major export markets. However, these economic risks are not considered before GE crops are approved. If Bill C-474 passes, it will likely prevent the planting of crops that we know will cause economic chaos, such as GE alfalfa and wheat.

Kelvin Einarson, director and secretary treasurer of the Manitoba Forage Seed Association, spoke at the Agriculture Committee hearings in June, stating, “Bill C-474 is the first step in offering some protection in the future for Canadian family farms. Market acceptance must be made part of the evaluation process and incorporated into the Seeds Regulation Act.”

Introduced by Alex Atamanenko, NDP Agriculture Critic and MP for BC Southern Interior, C-474 is the first Private Members Bill on genetic engineering to get this far in the Parliamentary process. The fight over the Bill is happening at the exact time the struggle to stop GE alfalfa is reaching a critical stage. The Bill could be voted on in early February, at the same time GE alfalfa could be approved in the US.

The New Democratic Party and the Bloc Quebecois are strong supporters of the Bill. The Conservative Party, however, despite depending upon a rural constituent base, is solidly pro-GE and is actively opposing the Bill. If Bill C-474 dies, it will be because the Liberal Party is not willing to support it and risk the ire of the biotech industry. Regardless of what happens to the Bill itself, the debate has exposed MPs to evidence of harm caused by GE crops and strong concern from voters.

The first big victory in the life of Bill C-474 was a vote in the House of Commons in April when a majority of MPs voted in favour of the Bill, sending it on to the Agriculture Committee for study. The biotechnology industry lobbied hard to stop this debate from even taking place so this vote was a victory for democracy. The House of Commons Agriculture Committee held hearings on Bill C-474 in June and heard critical testimony from alfalfa growers.

GM crisis for organics

Alfalfa growers do not need nor want GM alfalfa and have been trying to stop it for at least five years. The introduction of Monsanto’s GE herbicide tolerant (Roundup Ready) alfalfa would have serious negative impacts on many different types of farmers and farming systems, both conventional and organic. Without Bill C-474, there is no mechanism to even ask the question of what the economic cost of introducing GE alfalfa will be. Because alfalfa is a perennial crop pollinated by bees, GE contamination is inevitable. Alfalfa is used as pasture and high-protein feed for animals like dairy cows, beef cattle, lambs and pigs and is also used to build up nutrients in the soil, making it particularly important for organic farming. If introduced, GE alfalfa would ruin export markets for alfalfa products and threaten the future of organic food and farming in North America.

cont.
  1. groups:
    Community,   News and Politics,   Tech,   Green,   8 more
  2. tags:
    Environment,  Canada,  GMOs,  transgenic contamination,  7 more
  3.     
    |

10 comments // Canadian parliament debating negative economic impact of GM crops-Bill C-474

  • Itsbatman_Durr
    • 0
      Itsbatman_Durr  

    • to be honest, i dont have enough knowledge on this subject to choose a position.. BUT what i do know is that sadly governments and those we expect to look after our best interests do not do so, instead choosing to take the short term money over the long term effects on the populace. corruption and greed are the issues we need to root out, and like magic all issues such as these will be resolved as well

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
    • +1
      JanforGore  
    • Image

    • http://current.com/green/89752146_fighting-gmo-contamination-around-the-world.ht...

      This is happening globally now and it is crucial that this Congress also have a debate on the economic viability of continuing to support this unstable dangerous pseudo technology that is threatening our economy, our health and biodiversity. Many countries will not accept imports that include GMOs (which has lead to an increase in contamination events through US food aid as well as other clandestine tactics) and that is due primarily to citizen rejection and the loss of farmer's livelihoods due to transgenic contamination that has now affected I would say at least half the crops on this planet in some way. I absolutely believe this is the plan of biotech companies to infect the food supply without you even planting a seed. The more they infect the more organic farmers go out of business and the farther their tentacles can spread. Gm foods make GM humans and animals against our consent and it is undemocratic, unnatural and immoral. This simply cannot stand. So yes, Go Canada, give them hell.
      __________
      From the article:

      An invasion of illegal GMOs into Thai farms

      GM contamination was first reported in Thailand in 1999 after cotton samples from field research conducted by BIOTHAI and the Alternative Agriculture Network (AAN) were found to be contaminated with Bt cotton – a genetically engineered cotton variety produced by Monsanto. In 2004, tests made by Greenpeace revealed that a local farmer’s plantation in Khon Kaen province was contaminated by GM papaya. That farmer was one of 2,600 who had bought papaya seedlings from the Department of Agriculture’s research station where field trials of GM papaya were being conducted.

      At first, the government denied that GM crops were being grown in Thailand, but the contamination was so widespread that it reached another province, Ubol Ratchatani, where at least 90 farms had also received papaya seedlings. Most recently, in 2007, Chulalongkorn University’s Faculty of Science and BIOTHAI found GM contamination in maize, soya and cotton samples that they tested from provinces all over the country.

      The Thais believe that a two-pronged approach is necessary to address this situation. On the one hand, pressure should be put on the government to implement policies that protect the country from GM contamination. The Thai Working Group Against GMOs, which BIOTHAI coordinates, has organised numerous activities to keep the national moratorium on GMOs in place. They have sent petition letters, organised demonstrations in front of government offices, and pushed for a dialogue with top officials, including the deputy Prime Minister and Secretaries of Health and Agriculture. These efforts had an impact : on 25 December 2007, the Thai government announced its rules on GMOs which include, among other things, a mandatory public hearing prior to field testing, and a recommendation that approval from the local people in the field test area, as well as from independent NGOs and the academic community, should be obtained. From the perspective of BIOTHAI – which is currently running a campaign to develop a People’s Biosafety Law – this was an important victory.

      On the other hand, the Thais are working to increase local capacity to develop systems to detect contamination and deal with its impacts. The Khao Kwan Foundation (KKF), one of the founding organisations of AAN, has been mobilising farmers’ knowledge to identify contaminated seeds and to control or eliminate them. The KKF runs trainings and workshops on seed breeding and selection, which indirectly deal with contamination.

      KKF believes that farmers are able to notice anything abnormal in their crops, because of their in-depth knowledge of seeds and their skill in selection. Whether it is the colour, the hardness or the smell, every variety has peculiarities that farmers who have been working on seeds know in detail. So any alterations will be easily detected, even before the plant starts to flower.

      Daycha Siripatra, founder of KKF, says: “This is the principle of local adaptability. We’ve made our seeds recognise their environment and use that environment to express their potential. An alien seed, like a GMO, will not automatically thrive in our area and, even if it grows, farmers will be able to notice it right away, just from its appearance.”

    • 1 year ago
  • artemis6
  • CalgarC
  • CarlosIsDown
  • CalgarC
  • JanforGore
    • +4
      JanforGore  
    • Image

    • http://current.com/news/91104377_gm-flax-contamination-from-canadian-exports-soa...

      And considering the illegal export of GM triffid flax this past year that contaminated 28 countries where it is illegal for human consumption, it is no wonder this is such an important issue. It would appear that the biotech industry is trying to impede free speech regarding this because they know of its dangers, but they don't care. It's time for the satyagraha regarding this globally. It's time to tell them they won't shut us up regarding our food, our health, and the biodiveristy of our world with their food fascism.

      Consumer rejection is what this all hinges on.

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
    • +4
      JanforGore  

    • To even see these votes and this debate is a victory for democracy and the people working to be heard. This is a good trend for 2011. It is obvious that Ge crops are having and will have negative impacts on the global economy as the truth about their health and environmental effects and the hardship to organic farmers come to the fore. To also sacrifice our biodiversity to a monoculture world simply for the profit of a few is simply insane.

    • 1 year ago
  • hunzedog
  • JanforGore
more from Tech:
from the community

top videos