Changing the face of farming - nightmare vision has government backing

[Guest guest]

Changing the face of farming - nightmare vision has

government backing

 

 

" GM WATCH " <info

Sat, 5 Mar 2005 13:01:10 GMT

 

 

 

 

GM WATCH daily

http://www.gmwatch.org

------

 

Changing the face of farming - nightmare vision has government backing

 

Reading through the recommendations on the future of agriculture in

Canada detailed below, it's hard to believe it's hard to believe the

report they come from is not some terrible joke , but, in fact, 'the

[Canadian] government has been deeply supportive. It provided $600,000 in

funding for the report and, through the Canadian Food Inspection Agency,

donated staff, office space and equipment. In a forward to the report,

Bob Speller, the former minister of agriculture and agri-food,

congratulated the seed companies for their report and said " I look

forward to our

continued partnership as the sector pursues this plan for growth and

competitiveness. " '

------

Case not made for new seeds

CAMERON SMITH

Toronto Star, Mar. 5, 2005

 

Large seed companies are trying to change the face of farming in

Canada.

 

They want a lot more power over farmers. They want to be

self-regulating and out from under the thumb of government. And they

want the

Canadian market opened wide to genetically engineered seeds.

 

All of this is necessary, they say, because global trade has made

everything move faster.

 

In an 82-page report published in May, which can be found at

http://www.seedsectorreview.com, they say: " Today, the speed of

development for new varieties (of seeds) has escalated to the point

where the

life of a variety is very short. Innovative technology has brought with

it the ability to produce plants with new desirable traits within one

or two seasons, working in the laboratory rather than in the field. "

 

As a result, they say, they need robust profits from the sale of seeds

in order to finance research and development. And they need better

protection of their intellectual property rights in the seeds they

develop.

 

Specifically, they want to be the ones to certify seeds and they want

to ensure it is certified seeds that farmers buy. One way of doing this,

they say - while at the same time holding back from recommending it -

is to " link crop insurance premiums with use of certified seed. " In

other words, require farmers to pay higher insurance premiums if they

don't

use certified seeds.

 

Some of them want to prohibit farmers from saving seeds for planting

the following year, so farmers would have to buy new seeds every year

from the seed companies.

 

At the very least, under what is called a " cascading right, " they want

to increase dramatically a farmer's liability for improperly using or

selling seeds saved from a crop grown with a company's seeds. They want

to be able to penalize the farmer not just for the use or sale of the

seeds, but for all of the crops those seeds produce.

 

The difference is huge. It multiplies many times over the potential

liability that a farmer would face and would give companies a much bigger

stick with which to threaten farmers.

 

The report is called The Report of the Seed Sector Advisory Committee.

The public should pay attention to it because the federal government

has been deeply supportive.

 

It provided $600,000 in funding for the report and, through the

Canadian Food Inspection Agency, donated staff, office space and

equipment. In

a forward to the report, Bob Speller, the former minister of

agriculture and agri-food, congratulated the seed companies for their

report and

said " I look forward to our continued partnership as the sector pursues

this plan for growth and competitiveness. "

 

As I read the report, it hangs on the slender premise that things are

changing so fast that seed companies need to transform the way the

business is regulated.

 

I asked Darrin Qualman, director of research for the National Farmers

Union, about the claim that changes are necessary because new seeds are

produced so quickly. According to him, this is all smoke and mirrors.

 

Seeds can be developed faster, yes. But are they better? He says he has

been researching seed development over the past 40 to 50 years, and has

found that " in many cases, seeds are improving now at the same rate, or

slower, than they used to. "

 

So, has the case been proved that Canada needs this tectonic change in

the seed regulatory system? And do we need to open wide the gates to

genetically engineered seeds because companies say it would be

profitable?

 

To both questions, the answer surely is no.

 

Cameron Smith can be reached at camsmith.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

----------