Fwd: GMW:_Anti-GM_troops_set_for_action

[Guest guest]

GMW:_Anti-GM_troops_set_for_action

" GM_WATCH "

Sat, 17 Jan 2004 21:20:39 GMT

 

 

GM WATCH daily

http://www.gmwatch.org

---

Provides a good snapshot of the strength and diversity of current resistance to

the introduction of GM crops in New Zealand.

---

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3544150 & thesection=news & t

Anti-GM troops set for action

New Zealand Herald, 18.01.2004

By MATT NIPPERT

 

Heading the Environmental Risk Management Authority is not a job everyone would

relish. Since the lifting of the moratorium in October, this body has become the

new front line in the debate over genetic modification.

 

It is a debate its chairman, Neil Walker, recognises is " very fraught and highly

polarised, with a very high level of public debate and concern " .

 

The Life Sciences Network chairman William Rolleston welcomes the issue moving

to Erma, where " arguments can be made on a sound scientific basis, which is a

[more] controlled forum than the court of public opinion " .

 

Rolleston argues that public opinion has been already expressed and considered

through Parliament. While " public opinion is important, what needs to be taken

into consideration are the scientific issues to determine if something is safe

or not " .

 

But Tim Bale, senior lecturer in political science at Sussex University, and

until last September at Victoria University, says this separation between

" scientific debate " and the " court of public opinion " is spurious.

 

" It's in the interests of the pro-GM movement to remove public opinion from the

realm of scientific experts, " says Bale.

 

But public opinion is likely to play a crucial role in the coming year, as some

anti-GM protesters pursue a campaign of direct action. This has included calls

for the illegal destruction, or " decontamination " as its advocates call it, of

GM crops.

 

This new battle is part of " the old struggle for hearts and minds " , says senior

lecturer in political studies at Auckland University, Paul Buchanan.

 

" The real question for anti-GM activists is whether or not the use of

direct-action violence against property will advance their cause. "

 

Lenka Rochford, of Wellington, is spokeswoman for the People's Moratorium

Enforcement Agency - one of the newer groups which advocate direct action - and

she articulates the frustration that has led for calls to take the anti-GM

campaign to a new level.

 

" We've done petitions. We've done submissions. We've written letters to the

editor. We've even got naked on Parliament Grounds. We've done it all, and

nobody's listening. [Direct action] is all we've got left. "

 

The PMEA was born on the expiry of the moratorium. After a three-day occupation

at Parliament, members dismantled their tent city and left, a symbolic act

indicating they no longer had confidence in the Government to keep New Zealand

GM-free.

 

Instead they have moved to take matters into their own hands. This month they

held a camp with the express purpose of " training activists in direct action

techniques " . After Erma approval for a field trial of GM Roundup-resistant

onions, 150 people descended on Mountain Valley School in Motueka, an

independent institution running outside direct government control.

 

People attending were a mix of punks and anarchists, older alternative

lifestylers and urban students. There were workers from Greenpeace, GM

campaigners from Christchurch, Auckland, Wellington and Tauranga, and a fair

contingent of backpackers from Europe. Most were new to this sharp end of the

movement, but there was a hard and vocal core of veterans.

 

The mood was blunt, expressed succinctly by Penny Bright of Auckland. " When

injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. If you plant it [GM crops],

we'll pull it. "

 

Workshops dealt with how far the law can be bent before it is broken. They

learned how to blockade trucks and trains carrying GM produce and how to make

life difficult for those trying to end the protests, by methods such as

suspending themselves from tripods, difficult to dismantle without risk of

injury.

 

Crucially they also learned how " decontamination " should be undertaken to

minimise the risks of GM material spreading further into the environment.

 

Erma's Neil Walker expressed similar concerns, that crop-pullers may be doing

the environment they wish to protect more harm than good.

 

Crop and Food, who are running the onion trial this year, say activists breaking

into their facilities represent " the greatest potential cause of material

getting away from the site " .

 

Talk of direct action, and several actual cases, have had an effect on GM

research in this country. The destruction of a potato trial in 2002 led to the

loss of three years' research, says Crop and Food.

 

" These sorts of threats have an impact on the costs of carrying out research, "

says Life Science's Rolleston. " It just takes money away from science, " and

diverts it into increased spending on security.

 

Of course, increased costs for GM research leads to a decrease in GM field trial

research, something activists are unlikely to lose any sleep over.

 

Some indicator of public support for direct action on GM can be seen in the

Green Gloves register, a database of people who sign a pledge committing to pull

GM crops from the ground.

 

It recently added its 5000th name, and spokesman Logan Petley says its roll has

been swollen by people who believe that the " failing of the Government

responsibility to keep New Zealand GM-free means this responsibility has fallen

into the public's hands in the form of non-violent civil disobedience " .

 

Direct action is likely to meet stiff resistance. A Crop and Food spokesman says

" with regards to the onion trial, we have security measures in place and would

not hesitate to prosecute if research trials were vandalised " .

 

While there may be some public support for crop-pulling activists, it will not

be reflected by the legal system. The defence of necessity (the commissioning of

a crime to prevent greater harm), and self-defence have high thresholds in the

courts.

 

The case of Quaid Hutchinson gives some indication of what public support may

mean. Hutchinson, a Golden Bay anti-1080 poison campaigner, poured diesel into a

bin of the possum-control poison in 2001, rendering it unusable. He later turned

himself in and was charged with causing wilful damage. The judge disallowed his

attempts to use the defences of necessity and self-defence.

 

" In the end it was a bit farcical, " said Hutchinson. " Because they wouldn't

allow me a defence, the jury just had to decide whether I did it or not. It

still took them 45 minutes to reach a verdict. "

 

He was found guilty and fined $7056. In the following weeks the local community

and national 1080 campaign rallied behind him and helped to pay his fines.

 

The GM-Free movement, with a much wider support base, could be expected to

exceed these efforts, but with damages from the potato trial destruction

calculated at $300,000, for example, a significant increase in public support

would be needed to subsidise crop-pulling.

 

Hutchinson's advice to activists considering direct action is cautionary ...

" don't do it lightly " . But he expects his experience would be similar to those

who get caught destroying crops. " I think there will be a lot of support for

people who do take direct action against GM crops. "

 

Public support, however, is far from assured. Polls on GM are often

contradictory, with research selectively commissioned or supported by advocates

or opponents.

 

A Colmar Brunton poll last August showed 70 per cent support for food production

remaining GM-free. This grew to 80 per cent when a clause was added indicating

71 per cent of European consumers, a significant export market, did not want to

eat GM foods.

 

Amid the attention given to the militant edge of the movement, groups who have

campaigned under a legal banner say they will be continuing their efforts.

 

The group that put pink bras and four-breasted women into the popular lexicon,

Mothers and Daughters Against Genetic Engineering (Madge), are " ladies in

waiting at present " , says frontwoman Allanah Currie.

 

Currie says most of their members are busy " doing laundry because it's school

holidays " but a legal wrangle with Crop and Food is also inhibiting their

activities.

 

The Crown Research Institute is seeking $25,000 in costs over a failed judicial

review of the onion trial - Madge says they have only $1030.

 

Currie says their efforts will again focus on " purse power " , or the use of

economic pressure to lobby for GM-free foodstuffs.

 

" Consumer is queen in this argument - 80 per cent of the groceries in this

country are bought by women. "

 

This approach, using economic boycotts, has had some measure of success.

 

Simon Terry of the Sustainability Council says that " perhaps the most

significant lead-out in last year's debate was the response of leading food

companies " in deciding to ensure themselves GM-free.

 

These decisions were, he says, " based on the observation that consumer

resistance to GM ingredients was not going to go away " .

 

A significant portion of the " purse power " campaigns is the research undertaken

by Greenpeace, specifically its GE Free Food Guide, now in its third year of

publication. The guide colour-codes food companies in terms of their use of GM

ingredients, ranging from green (have removed GM), to orange (in process of

removal), and red (containing GM).

 

Steve Abel of Greenpeace says one interesting thing to develop from

communication with food companies has been the wording of company statements.

 

" They have shifted from condescending 'public misunderstanding of science' and

pro-GM propaganda to 'we are acknowledging public concern and acting

accordingly'. "

 

Food company Arnotts & Campbells last year slipped from green to red and as a

consequence were scheduled to be targeted by a PMEA protest campaign. A day

before the protests were due to begin the company released a statement making a

strong commitment to source GM-free ingredients, saying Greenpeace had

misinterpreted its policy statement.

 

Mainland Dairy and Cadbury & Pascalls, both listed as red, did not return calls

to discuss their status on the Greenpeace list.

 

Inside Parliament, the Green Party has not given up its fight.

 

Co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons says the Greens will keep up the pressure.

 

" If something goes wrong, the Government is going to be held accountable and

responsible, because the Government set it up that way. "

 

Anti-GM groups at a glance:

 

The Green Party - more than just GM, but certainly its most vigorous opponent in

Parliament.

 

Sustainability Council - policy think-tank backed by several prominent New

Zealanders including the late Sir Peter Elworthy.

 

GE-Free New Zealand Food and Environment - an information centre for other

groups.

 

Bio-Gro - an organisation that accredits farmers with organic status.

 

Physicians and Scientists for Responsible Genetics (PSRG) - an educational

organisation run by doctors and scientists.

 

Greenpeace - international environmental non-governmental organisation.

 

Mothers and Daughters Against Genetic Engineering (Madge) - lobby group of women

who support GM-free food.

 

Green Gloves - a pledge site to support non-violent direct action against GM.

 

People's Moratorium Enforcement Agency (PMEA) - direct action facilitator.

 

-----------------------

SUBSCRIPTIONS

-----------------------

 

http://www.gmwatch.org/sub.asp

 

archive

http://www.gmwatch.org/archive.asp

 

website

http://www.gmwatch.org

 

communications

ngin

 

donations to 'NGIN'

NGIN, 26 Pottergate, Norwich, NR2 1DX, UK

or e-mail for details: ngin

 

 

 

 

 

Hotjobs: Enter the " Signing Bonus " Sweepstakes