Guest guest Posted March 18, 2004 Report Share Posted March 18, 2004 WEEKLY_WATCH_64 " GM_WATCH " Thu, 18 Mar 2004 23:28:28 GMT ============================================================ THE WEEKLY WATCH NUMBER 64 ============================================================ --------------------------- from Claire Robinson, WEEKLY WATCH editor --------------------------- Dear all, Thanks to everyone who worked so hard in lobbying the Scottish Parliament to block the Executive’s approval of the UK’s first GM crop. We lost by just one vote. That one vote was only lacking because the usual Speaker (parliamentary chair) was absent and his place was taken by one of the Members opposing GM, who as a consequence couldn’t vote. Anthony Jackson of the Munlochy Vigil, who helped organize the lobbying, told GM WATCH, " Everyone will know now that if the Scottish Executive acquiesces in the necessary national seed listing for the UK, it will only be because by some odd chance the Speaker was away and an opposition member in his place. They know that they have absolutely no mandate. They also know the overwhelming majority of the Scottish people are completely opposed to the growing of GM crops " . It’s all down to Wales now to hold firm to its precautionary principles; it could still prevent or delay commercialization for the whole UK. Meanwhile, Monsanto-trained scientist Florence Wambugu has re-surfaced with the astonishing claim that the failed GM sweet potato project in Kenya was really a resounding success . Her latest story is that the GM sweet potato, touted as the food that would save Africans from famine, was merely an early-stage research artefact that was never meant for commercialisation. Yeah, absolutely, Flo, and Elvis is right here with me and sends his love. See LIE OF THE WEEK for a good laugh. Claire claire www.ngin.org.uk / www.gmwatch.org --------------------------- CONTENTS --------------------------- HIGHLIGHTS OF THE WEEK - UK HIGHLIGHTS OF THE WEEK - GLOBAL LIE OF THE WEEK QUOTE OF THE WEEK DONATIONS HEADLINES OF THE WEEK SUBSCRIPTIONS --------------------------- HIGHLIGHTS OF THE WEEK - UK --------------------------- + ONLY PARLIAMENTARY PECULIARITY PREVENTS SCOTLAND BLOCKING GM FOR ENTIRE UK On 18 March the Scottish Parliament came within a vote of blocking GM crop cultivation across the whole UK. Indeed, Blair and the Executive only avoided disaster because of the peculiarity of Scottish parliamentary arrangements. The vote for the opposition Scottish National Party's motion calling for GM crop approval to be blocked was 59. 60 voted against and there was 1 abstention. But crucially, an opposition member, rather than the Speaker, was in the Chair. This debarred the opposition member from voting for the motion to block GM crops. If the other Deputy Speaker had been in the Chair, the motion would have been carried and the Executive defeated. Anthony Jackson of the Munlochy Vigil told GM WATCH, " It is totally bizarre that only the Speaker's absence from Parliament could stop the blocking of GM crops from being grown anywhere in the UK. Everyone will know now that if the Scottish Executive acquiesces in the necessary national seed listing for the UK, it will only be because by some odd chance the Speaker was away and an opposition member in his place. They know that they have absolutely no mandate. They also know the overwhelming majority of the Scottish people are completely opposed to the growing of GM crops " . Anthony thanked all those who wrote to Scottish Members of Parliament to tell them of their concerns over GM crops. " E-mails and letters have been flooding in, " he said. " MSPs have never seen anything like it. But they may have to get used to it because this is just the start of our campaign to make sure that GM crops are never ever grown commercially in Scotland or anywhere else in the UK. " + Greens claim backing GM is illegal The Scottish Executive’s decision to support Westminster's approval for GM maize could be either illegal or based on a flawed interpretation of the law, according to the Scottish Green Party. Green MSPs have demanded the release of the legal advice held by the Executive on the extent of its powers to block GM maize. + Wales may still hold GM maize veto Plans to allow farmers to grow a form of GM maize in Britain could still be foiled in Wales. UK environment secretary Margaret Beckett will need the signature of her Welsh counterpart, Carwyn Jones, before the Chardon LL maize, also known as T25, is added to the National Seeds List. In a deal struck behind the scenes and announced last week, Mr Jones has agreed to listing in principle and Mrs Beckett agreed that Westminster will not stand in the way of co-existence measures, which should keep the crop out of Wales. But Mr Jones insisted that he would not place Chardon LL on the National Seeds List until other measures are in place. These include a variation in the conditions attached to the current consent, co-existence measures to protect conventional and organic farming from GM contamination, voluntary GM-free zones and a liability and compensation scheme for anyone damaged by GM contamination. GM Free Cymru says the measures might take years to put in place, and might never actually be agreed. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=2906 + PROF PERRY AND 'SOUND SCIENCE' The British government says its decision on GM maize commercialisation was based on “sound science”. Pre-eminent amongst those scientists offering their version of “sound science” is Prof Joe Perry, chief statistician of the Farm Scale Evaluation trials and lead signatory of the letter published in such a timely fashion (just in time for the commercialisation announcement) on Nature's website, “Ban on triazine herbicides likely to reduce but not negate relative benefits of GMHT maize”. But there are some who feel that whether or not Prof Perry's academic credentials are A1, his understanding of the countryside is decidedly suspect. At a public meeting held in Market Rasen, Lincolnshire in 1999 and attended by about 400 local people, Prof Perry was speaking for the adoption of GM crops (even though he was one of the scientists charged with setting up the FSEs and accessing the impact of GM crops on the environment). Questioned about cross-pollination and separation distances between GM and non-GM crops Prof Perry said that cross-pollination was very unlikely. This was around the time that Judith Jordan (later Rylott) of AgrEvo (now Bayer) gave evidence under oath that the chances of cross-pollination beyond 50m were as likely as getting pregnant from a lavatory seat! We now know that cross-pollination occurs at up to 4km. Challenged by a local bee-keeper on his statement that cross-pollination is very unlikely, Prof Perry stated that bees only fly a maximum distance of 50m from the hive! Well, this was a rural audience of country people, farmers and gardeners and they all know bees fly a great deal further than 50m. After the howls of laughter had died down, the audience turned on Prof Perry and gave him a very unpleasant time. Some questioners asked what happened when the bees got to the 50m limit - did they just drop out of the sky? He replied by saying that he was a government-funded scientist with a specialist knowledge of entomology and therefore he knew best - to which one questioner suggested that he must to the well-known scientific opinion that the bumble bee can't fly because he is obviously unable to make observations from the natural world that surrounds him. Needless to say, the audience, which before the meeting was probably split 50:50 for and against GM, voted, thanks to Prof Perry and the growing public disquiet about government-connected experts, by a large majority to ban GM crops from Lincolnshire. The public lost confidence in scientific experts long ago but is the government really confident in basing its decision to license GM maize (with all the implications of that decision for health and the environment) on the “sound science” offered by the likes of Prof Perry - someone who seems pugnaciously determined to prove he is right regardless of the ground realities? Read about the dodgy science of other signatories of the Nature letter at http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=2906 + BLAIR GOVT FORCED TO REVEAL SECRET MEETINGS In a victory for freedom of information, the parliamentary ombudsman has forced Tony Blair to reveal his meetings with commercial lobbyists. Ann Abraham, the ombudsman, has found No 10 guilty of unjustifiably keeping secret contacts between ministers and commercial companies who are seeking to influence them. Downing Street has been compelled to admit that a Labour donor met the prime minister at a sensitive time when he was seeking to win a lucrative contract from the government. Dr Paul Drayson, head of the BioIndustry Association (motto: “Promoting UK Biotechnology”) who donated GBP100,000 to Labour, provoked controversy when the government awarded his company PowderJect, without any competition, a GBP32m contract. Previously, the Guardian newspaper requested under the open government code a list of contacts between the prime minister and the BioIndustry Association, the trade body for the biotech industry, which was headed by Dr Drayson at that time. The request was rejected. The ombudsman ruled that such blanket secrecy was unacceptable. She criticised officials for frustrating her investigation. She did not find " persuasive " Downing Street's argument that releasing the information would damage the work of the government, adding that officials had " given no detailed reasons " for this belief. She also dismissed another Downing Street claim that listing the contacts would betray the commercial secrets of the BioIndustry Association and hurt its competitive position. The ombudsman's ruling has created a precedent that the existence of such meetings should be disclosed. But officials are continuing to take an obstructive attitude, despite their defeat. Rather than release details of other meetings with lobbyists on request, the Cabinet Office has circulated guidance to other ministries insisting each application be considered on its merits, and made the subject of a prolonged and formal open government request. --------------------------- OTHER HIGHLIGHTS OF THE WEEK - GLOBAL --------------------------- + HAWAII’S COFFEE INDUSTRY UNITES AGAINST GM In another sign of burgeoning resistance to GM in the US, Hawaii's coffee growers have united in a call to stop GM coffee being introduced into the state. Hawaii is often cited as pro-GM state but a joint letter and resolution opposing the growing and field or greenhouse testing of GM coffee has been sent to the Hawaii Dept of Agriculture from all of Hawaii's coffee growers. They are calling on the Dept of Agriculture and the University of Hawaii to do their job and protect the Hawaii coffee industry. + Monsanto raises idea of US-only GMO wheat release Monsanto is discussing with the US wheat industry whether it should be held to its promise not to release GM wheat in the US unless it can simultaneously market it in Canada, wheat industry officials said. Monsanto told officials from wheat growers and wheat marketing organizations that it was facing stiff opposition to its GM wheat in Canada. The company raised the possibility of " alternative strategies " to the simultaneous U.S.-Canadian release it has pledged to the wheat industry for more than a year. US wheat growers do not want Monsanto's GM wheat introduced only in the US. They fear foreign buyers opposed to GM foods would shift their purchases to Canada, the United States' top competitor for hard red spring wheat sales. US Wheat President Alan Tracy said, " If we introduce and the Canadians do not that would make it easier for countries to continue to insist on buying from a country that is GM-free and it would give Canada a distinct marketing advantage. " http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=2903 + USDA world survey shows world doesn’t want GM wheat Results of a new US survey of global attitudes toward GM wheat indicate widespread opposition or uncertainty about imports if the product were to be approved for commercial sales. Some major grain-importing countries would refuse to buy GM wheat if it became commercially available, or are uncertain of their reaction, according to the survey by the US Dept of Agriculture. The survey also found that key countries such as Japan and South Korea might refuse non-GM wheat from a country if it approved just one variety of GM wheat. + US State Dept uses taxpayer dollars to promote GM The US government has launched a new website about GM crops as part of a taxpayer-funded project to promote such crops worldwide. The efforts, which come amid a tense global debate over GM foods, outrage opponents, who say the Bush administration is using taxpayer money to support corporate interests for a potentially unsafe technology. It is the latest in a multipronged initiative by the State Department to " encourage broader adoption and acceptance of biotechnology in the developing world, " according to Deborah Malac, chief of the Biotechnology and Textile Trade Policy Division of the State Department's Office of Agricultural, Biotechnology and Textile Trade Affairs. Malac said her office manages a " Biotechnology Support " fund, which is receiving $500,000 this year on top of $1 million over the past two years. The funds - the first to be designated by the State Department for any special agricultural promotion - are used to send speakers abroad, to fund workshops for " decision makers " and to facilitate regulator-to-regulator meetings, she said. Malac said the State Department so far has won small " victories, " including agreement by the Philippines to allow planting of GM corn and India's acceptance of GM cotton. + The Averys' idea of " Earth Friendly, Farm Friendly " The Hudson Institute's Center for Global Food Issues recently announced the label " Earth Friendly, Farm Friendly " for dairy producers and processors that follow its industrial, corporate agenda for food production. The center attacks organic agriculture and applauds genetically modified food. Its website promotes feedlots, with one story claiming that cows are " more than happy to stand with their friends on a cement feedlot floor (protecting the ecosystem). " Appearing next to the " Earth Friendly " label promotion is an ad for a book titled Saving the Planet With Pesticides and Plastic, written by the center's director, Dennis Avery. Excerpt from “Good Label Manners: Not all ‘eco-labels’ are created equal”, by Matthew L. Miller, 16 Mar 2004 + MORE AVER-ISMS “Biotechnology is demonstrating itself to be the most wildlife friendly agricultural technology since the development of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer saved huge swaths of wildlife habitat from conversion to green manure crops. “The National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy estimates that biotech crops have already reduced pesticide sprays in the United States by over 45 million pounds per year...” Excerpt from Alex Avery, “Biotech is for the birds”, guest editorial, BioScience News and Advocate, March 16, 2004 + Dodgy deals and irresponsible care A document leaked to Greenpeace has revealed the secret plans of the American Chemistry Council (of which Monsanto and Dow are members) to trash anti-pollution laws in California. The internal memo, a proposal from PR firm Nichols-Dezenhall, outlines tactics such as the creation of phoney front groups and spying on activists to undermine pioneering laws that protect the environment. Excerpt from Greenpeace’s press release: “One concept the chemical industry really doesn't like is called the precautionary principle. This means that new chemicals must be proved safe before they can be produced on environmental and health grounds. This principle is becoming established in laws in Europe but has yet to gain a foothold in the US. “What the US chemicals industry really fears is that new laws on chemicals being debated in the EU will inspire new laws in the US. The proposed EU laws place more emphasis on protection the environment and health. So the industry is fighting tooth and nail against the new laws in Europe with, of course, help from the corporate-friendly US administration. “To prevent the precautionary principle gaining a foothold in California the memo, obtained by the Environmental Working Group through an undisclosed source, recommends to ACC members that they pay US$120,000 a year to Public Relations and 'marketplace defence' firm, Nichols-Dezenhall. This firm reportedly hires former FBI and CIA agents to conduct selective intelligence gathering about the plans, motivations and allies of opposition. The memo says Nichols-Dezenhall would also create an independent watchdog group to act as an information clearing house and attack the precautionary principle laws in public and media forums.” http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=2901 + SOUTH AFRICA’S REGULATORY SHAMBLES An article by a South African politician makes clear that, in the only country in sub-Saharan Africa where there is significant commercial growing of GM crops, the weak regulations that exist are not even being applied. + GM SUPPORTERS CONFRONTED IN INDIA The Indian environmental group Pasumai Thaayagam confronted GE supporters at their meeting on " Shaping the future of Rice " in Chennai, India. The group carried a banner saying, " Rice is life - Not corporate business. " Dr R. Anbumani, President, Pasumai Thaayagam, said, " The growth rate of rice production in India has come down drastically from 3.0 percent per annum during the period 1985-89 to 1.5 percent currently. In certain pockets, the growth rates have remained stagnant. This is the direct outcome of the Green Revolution, which blindly copied western methods of farming that used heavy doses of chemical fertilizers, pesticides and insecticides, resulting in incalculable damage to the soil. “Pasumai Thaayagam will strongly oppose the development, cultivation, and import/export of genetically modified rice because it ignores food safety, weakens both domestic and global agriculture, and negatively impacts the environment. And also because the future of our children and the country is at stake. " + US cuts off food aid to Sudan According to testimony made by USAID it has stopped all further food aid shipments to Port Sudan because the government Of Sudan has asked that US commodities be certified free of GMOs. They are doing this even though they have been warned by the United Nations that food stocks for relief operations will be exhausted by April/May of this year. USAID in its own testimony admits, " the potential humanitarian consequences of this pipeline break for the needy in Sudan cannot be over-emphasized " . According to USAID, the United States is the major donor of food aid to Sudan, providing some 70% of the World Food Program's total pipeline for the country. + Big firms dig in to Asian rice bowl Control over rice, Asia's staple food, is steadily passing into the hands of transnational corporations based far away in Europe and the US which use unfair patents and genetic modification of food. As the world marks the International Year of Rice, agribusiness giants led by DuPont in the US are working to select rice genes they reckon would be commercially useful. The scramble for monopoly control over rice genes began two years ago after the Swiss agribusiness giant Syngenta and Myriad Genetics Inc in the US announced the sequencing of 99.5 percent of rice DNA. Food security expert Devinder Sharma says that since then, some 900 genes, representing traits such as resistance to droughts, pests, pesticides and salinity and higher yield and nutrients, have already been patented by multinationals. DuPont, he says, tops this list. ---------------------- LIE OF THE WEEK ---------------------- + WAMBUGU CLAIMS SWEET POTATO CATASTROPHE A GREAT SUCCESS! Here's a funny thing. Back in January a Kenyan newspaper reported that three year trials to test the GM sweet potato developed by Monsanto with the support of USAID, ISAAA and the World Bank, had shown it to be a failure and that it had even been outperformed by conventional sweet potatoes. The project's failure was also prominently reported in New Scientist, and it has also been referred to in other articles, including one in The Guardian. Now, two months after the original piece appeared, up pops the Kenyan scientist, Florence Wambugu, who was recruited by Monsanto and USAID to front the project, claiming that far from being a complete dud as reported, " the GM sweet potato has been a resounding scientific success " ! In her press release and statement Wambugu makes no reference to the New Scientist piece but instead attributes criticism of the project to " what anti-GM activists are saying " . As neither the Kenyan paper, the New Scientist nor The Guardian appears to have been asked to publish corrections, or even to have received letters disputing their reports, it is reasonable to ask where on earth the normally highly vocal Dr Wambugu, ISAAA and Monsanto have been for the last two months. We checked with the journalist who wrote the New Scientist piece that nobody had contacted them to say the story was wrong. Nobody had. He also told us that he had received no reply from Dr Wambugu to his request for a comment prior to publication. Perhaps this has been a case of alien abduction? Obviously, it couldn't be that it has taken two months for Dr Wambugu to come up with this story?! According to Wambugu's story, the 3 years of field trials weren't really testing the GM sweet potato, they were just a way of testing the extent of the problems faced at a very early stage in the project. This is also extremely curious because it was originally said a finished GM sweet potato would be available in 2002! Wambugu also claims that this GM sweet potato was never intended for commercialisation. This is not the first time the biotech industry has used this ploy to evade responsibility for a useless or dangerous GM food. After Dr Pusztai found that a type of GM potato harmed rats who ate it, pro-biotech scientists claimed that it was never intended for commercialisation, when, in fact, it was developed for this very purpose. Indeed, had Dr Pusztai not done his experiments, we would be eating the toxic potato today. This may in fact be the first time that Wambugu has made any attempt to correct a " misleading " report about the GM sweet potato. When for instance, the Toronto Globe & Mail reported in July 2003, “Dr Wambugu's modified sweet potato... can increase yields from four tonnes per hectare to 10 tonnes”, Wambugu, far from pointing out that it couldn't because it was only at a very early stage in the project, appears to have been the source of the information. Nor for that matter did she point out that according to the FAO and Kenyan national statistics typical yields for non-GM sweet potatoes are not 4 tonnes but about 10 tonnes! According to Aaron deGrassi of the Institute of Development Studies misleadingly low figures on average yields in Kenya have been used " to paint a picture of stagnation " . The GM sweet potatoes, by contrast, have been presented by Wambugu as an agricultural revolution in Africa. To quote an article in Forbes magazine, “While the West debates the ethics of GM food, Florence Wambugu is using it to feed her country.” (“Millions served; Florence Wambugu feeds her country with food others have the luxury to avoid”, December 23, 2002) The implication of the article was that this trial technology was already benefiting the people of Kenya. The article reported that the results were “astonishing”: “The sweet potato is sub-Saharan Africa's first genetically modified crop, and its yields so far are double that of the regular plant. Potatoes are bigger and richer in color, indicating they've retained more nutritional value.” For hungry Africa, we were told, “Wambugu's modified sweet potato offers tangible hope.” Sadly, it appears to offer very little hope of hungry Africa, or anyone else, being told the truth. In the article containing Wambugu's claims, she attempts to defend the project in terms of the training of Kenyan scientists in biotechnology transformation methods and bio-safety testing. As Aaron deGrassi has pointed out, " such discipline-specific capacity building in biotechnology may produce a 'lock-in' effect diverting resources from other potentially productive issues and methods " . This, of course, is precisely the intention. For the Wambugu article, Kenyan Genetic Scientist Defends GM Sweet Potato, http://www.truthabouttrade.org/article.asp?id=1474. ------- QUOTE OF THE WEEK ------- DR SUSAN BARDOCZ ON GM FOOD SAFETY " They say in the US, everyone has been eating GM food for the past eight years and nothing has happened... how do they know... GM food is not labelled. A lot of people don't know whether they are eating it or not. That is why industry does not want labelling. They know they can get sued. " From an interview with Dr Arpad Pusztai and his wife and former research collaborator, Dr Susan Bardocz, in an excellent article by Sarah Sabaratnam, “Standing up for the truth about GM food”, New Straits Times (Malaysia), March 16, 2004 http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=2905 ------- DONATIONS ------- Our thanks to all of you who have donated to GM WATCH. For those who have not yet contributed, you can donate online in any one of five currencies via PayPal, at http://www.gmwatch.org/donate.asp OR by cheque or postal order payable to 'NGIN', to be sent to: NGIN, 26 Pottergate, Norwich, NR2 1DX, UK. We appreciate your support. ------- HEADLINES OF THE WEEK: from the GMWATCH archive ------- 17/3/2004 Final day to email Scottish members of Parliament / Munlochy 17/3/2004 Prof Joe Perry et al's 'sound science' - and other tales 17/3/2004 Standing up for the truth about GM food 16/3/2004 Dodgy deals and irresponsible care 16/3/2004 Downing St forced to reveal secret meetings 16/3/2004 Monsanto raises idea of U.S.-only GMO wheat release / the Averys 15/3/2004 GM supporters confronted in India 15/3/2004 Ministers face GM showdown in Scotland/HELP US WIN 15/3/2004 South Africa's regulatory shambles 14/3/2004 ALERT - Lobby Scottish Parliament - STOP GM! 13/3/2004 Hawaii's coffee industry unites against GM 13/3/2004 Scotland and Wales 'bullied' over GM crop veto 13/3/2004 THE WEEKLY WATCH number 63 13/3/2004 U.S. State Dept. Promotes Biotech, Garners Critics 13/3/2004 US cuts off food aid to Sudan over GMOs 13/3/2004 USDA world survey shows widespread opposition to GM wheat FOR THE COMPLETE GMWATCH ARCHIVE: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive.asp ----------------------- SUBSCRIPTIONS ----------------------- http://www.gmwatch.org/sub.asp communicate ngin donate http://www.gmwatch.org/donate.asp archive http://www.gmwatch.org/archive.asp websites http://www.gmwatch.org http://www.ngin.org.uk Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam 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.