Guest guest Posted April 2, 2003 Report Share Posted April 2, 2003 Real food news - March 2003 Pesticides continue to cause concern The latest round of pesticide residue results from the Government yet again show reasons for concern (see 26 February). Spinach from Asda exceeded safety levels, which could lead to " symptoms such as increased salivation, an upset stomach or a mild headache " in toddlers eating the spinach - " but these effects would be expected to be short-lived (lasting not longer than six hours) " . So that's all right then. Dried fruit, bread and chip shop chips were also found to contain pesticide residues in significant numbers of samples. Some chips had traces of aldicarb. But this highly toxic pesticide will continue to be used in the UK - for " essential use " following a decision by European farm ministers (see 19 March). However major retailers including Tesco have prohibited aldicarb's use on potatoes and found alternatives. GM continues to court controversy Another great success in our GM-free Britain campaign, with the announcement that South Gloucestershire has voted in favour of a strong motion to stay GM-free and register their concerns with the Government (see 27 February). Meanwhile in Wales GM-free Cymru stepped up the pace of its campaign with a witty " keep my meat and veg GM-free " billboard in front of the Welsh Assembly (see 3 March), featuring part of a man and his underwear. This coincided with the publication of a legal opinion making it clear that the Welsh Assembly does have the power to resist the commercialisation of the Chardon LL GM seed. But in Europe things were not running so smoothly, with the launch of EC plans for the co-existence of GM and non-GM crops, admitting that non-GM farmers would end up paying to take measures to prevent contamination, and giving the biotech industry " a licence to pollute our food, farming and the environment " (see 5 March). The GM debate continues to lurch from controversy to controversy (see 21 March), this time due to press articles that emerged following a DEFRA private briefing of media correspondents. Articles appeared such as that in Farmer's Weekly Interactive stating that " Government officials have confirmed that this summer's debate on GM crops will not influence whether they are grown in the UK " . The debate steering board are obviously concerned that they may be wasting their time. Supermarkets still giving farmers a raw deal The Supermarket Code of Practice, intended to protect suppliers from the power of supermarkets, is doing nothing of the sort, according to our survey of farmers and growers (see 17 March). Most farmers did not feel that the code had improved the way supermarkets did business with them, and a significant number were afraid to complain for fear of being " delisted " and losing the market for their produce. You can find the full media briefing at http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefings/supermarket_code_practice.pdf , and our new supermarket briefing Super Markets or Corporate Bullies? at http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefings/super_markets_or_corporate.pd f Thank you for your support and help with our campaigns. Liz Wright Friends of the Earth Real Food & Farming Campaign Assistant 20 March Credibility of GM public debate hangs by a thread The credibility of the independent public debate on the commercialisation of genetically modified (GM) food and crops is in the balance following an open meeting of the Debate Steering Board. Members expressed concern at the meeting that a DEFRA private briefing of media correspondents earlier in the week (18 March) had resulted in articles stating that: " Government officials have confirmed that this summer's debate on GM crops will not influence whether they are grown in the UK. " (Farmers'Weekly Interactive 19 March 2003) Chairman of the debate steering board Professor Malcolm Grant said he had written to DEFRA Secretary of State Margaret Beckett to seek " reassurance that we are not wasting our time " . Other members expressed concern that if decisions on commercialising GM crops were made in the run-up or during the debate, the credibility and value of the debate in the eyes of the public would be seriously damaged. The principle aim of the GM debate clearly included consideration of whether GM food and crops should be grown commercially in the UK. There are currently 19 applications submitted through the EU (two to the UK) for commercial marketing consents for GM seeds. The UK is required to give an opinion on all of them in a rigid time-scale set down by EC Directive. This means that the UK has to say yes or no to each application during the debate. However, the Government can ask for more information on the applications which would delay the decision making process. " The public credibility of the GM public debate is hanging by a thread. The Secretary of State must make an unequivocal statement that the Government will listen to the views of the public, as gathered through the GM Public Debate, before making a decision on the commercialisation of GM. Otherwise the Debate Steering Committee are right to think they are wasting their time. Ministers must also provide an assurance that they will not give an opinion on any application until after the debate. Failure to provide such assurances will seriously undermine the whole debate in the eyes of the public, " said Friends of the Earth's Real Food Campaigner, Pete Riley. 19 March UK votes to keep highly toxic pesticide The highly toxic pesticide aldicarb will continue to be used on vegetables in the UK following a decision by European farm ministers. Friends of the Earth learned that UK Agriculture Minister Lord Whitty voted in favour of the compromise position which allows eight member states including the UK to continue using aldicarb on some vegetable crops for so-called " essential use " . Aldicarb is used to kill insects and nematodes on crops. It is a highly toxic pesticide and is classified by the World Health Organisation as " extremely hazardous " . It works on the nervous system in a similar way to organophosphates. Residues of aldicarb have been found in food exceeding safety levels for young children. The decision makes a mockery of the EU review of pesticides, which states that " essential use " should not be granted if the substance has harmful effects on human or animal health and should only be allowed where no efficient alternatives exist. In the UK aldicarb will continue to be authorised for use on potatoes, parsnips, carrots, onions and 'ornamentals' (decorative plants). The " essential use " status was because it was argued that alternatives are not available. However well known alternatives include other chemical control methods and changes in farming methods, such as crop rotation, and using diverse vegetable varieties. Residues can be reduced by peeling potatoes rather than eating them in their skins, but the Government withdrew advice on peeling fruit and vegetables last year. Aldicarb was recently found in samples of chips from fish and chip shops. Aldicarb is also potentially very harmful to farmland wildlife. It is estimated that one granule is enough to kill a small bird. The decision is good news for pesticide company Bayer who have been promoting their aldicarb-based product 'Temik' with full page adverts in the farming press. " The review of aldicarb has been going on for years. The Government should have used this time to ensure that safe non-chemical means of pest and disease control were available to farmers, " said Friends of the Earth's Real Food Campaigner, Sandra Bell. 17 March 2003 Supermarket code fails farmers A survey of farmers and growers published by Friends of the Earth reveals many feel the Supermarket Code of Practice, introduced a year ago, has made no difference to the way in which supermarkets did business with them. The survey also shows that farmers feel they cannot complain about supermarket practice because of fears that they will lose their contract and the market for their produce. Working with the help of farming and public interest organisations, Friends of the Earth contacted UK farmers to ask about how they had been affected by the Supermarket Code of Practice, introduced a year ago following a Competition Commission investigation into the biggest supermarkets. The survey findings, based on the responses of 161 farmers and growers from the dairy, livestock, arable, and fruit and vegetable growing sectors, showed: - Fewer than half of those responding (44 per cent) were aware of the Code of Practice. - More than half (58 per cent) did not think the code had made any different to the way supermarkets did business with them. - Supermarkets currently covered by the code were all cited as continuing practices identified as being of concern to the Competition Commission. - Just over a quarter (26 per cent) of farmers had been required to change transport or product packaging, without receiving compensation for additional costs; and 16 per cent had to meet the cost of unsold or wasted products, although the product was not at fault. - Many farmers said they were being paid the same or less than the price of production for their produce (eg 52 per cent of dairy farmers). - Many farmers support the idea of new legislation to prohibit the unfair trading practices of the supermarkets, and for an independent regulator to oversee the way in which supermarkets do business with suppliers. - About a third of respondents who had experience problems supplying supermarkets said that " fear of delisting " was their reason for not complaining. Friends of the Earth wants the Government to strengthen the Supermarket Code of Practice in line with the original recommendations made by the Competition Commission, and to impose this on supermarkets. The new code should be extended to cover farmers who supply supermarkets via an intermediary, such as a wholesaler or dairy. And the Government should appoint a new independent watchdog to ensure the new Code of Practice is effective. 5 March Shameful EU plans for growing GM crops Friends of the Earth attacked EU Commission plans launched by Agriculture Commissioner Franz Fischler to allow GM crops to be grown along side conventional and organic crops. The controversial plans for the co-existence of GM, conventional and organic crops says that non- GM farmers such as organic producers would end up paying for taking measures to prevent GM contamination. Research last year showed that the costs for organic growers could increase by 41 per cent. Co-existence is not only an economic problem. It ignores the environmental consequences of GM contamination or the impact it will have on consumer choice. European scientists have already stated that if GM crops are grown on a large scale then consumer choice will be threatened. GM-free areas or countries should be excluded. The number of areas and regions wishing to be GM-free are growing throughout Europe. The Commission, whilst agreeing that this is an effective way of reducing GM contamination, opposes such moves. The Commission also hints strongly that contamination of organic foods by GMOs should be permitted. Under current EU law, no contamination of organic food by GM material is allowed. European consumers have already made their opposition to GM foods clear with 71 per cent saying they do not want it. " These dreadful proposals would give the biotech industry a licence to pollute our food, farming and the environment. European consumers have made it clear that they don't want GM crops - but if Fischler gets his way we will have to pay much more to avoid eating them, " said Friends of the Earth's GM Campaigner, Pete Riley. " Growing GM crops will cause chaos in the countryside. Farmers will be in conflict with each other over the right to grow GM-free crops. The Commission must make it absolutely clear that the cost of GM pollution must be paid by biotech firms and those growing GM crops, and not by non-GM farmers and consumers. " ******************************************************* Want to test drive our new website? Friends of the Earth is building a new website for community campaigners - and we need your help. Do you campaign in your local community or at a regional or national level? Would you like to work with other activists and share skills? Got ideas you've been itching to tell others about? If any of these are true then we'd like to offer you the chance to play a key role in our new site's development. We're looking for people who are willing to test and suggest as the site develops between Mid-April and the end of May. Ideally you'd be willing to log on to the site a couple of times a week and comment on what you see. *Here's how you can get involved* Send an email to kenr with a brief description of: Internet experience - how long and often/what you use it for? Campaigning - Seasoned or new/member of local group? Any other relevant skills/information? We'll be in touch in a few weeks once the development site is online. Many thanks, Kenneth ******************************************************* http://www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/food_and_biotechnology --- - this message is from realfood Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.