by BRIAN LOCKHART
Grain Farmers of Ontario is protesting a proposal that would make the registration of genetically modified seeds in Canada contingent on how other countries view them.
The private member’s bill C-474 passed second reading in the House of Commons on Wednesday. Introduced by British Columbia MP and NDP agriculture critic Alex Atamanenko, the bill proposes to amend the Seeds Regulations Act to require an assessment of the impact of genetically modified seeds on export markets.
Barry Senft, Grain Farmers of Ontario CEO, says the current process has a “clear cut criteria when genetically modified products are brought forward whether they get registered or not.”
The proposed bill, he says, would just create more red tape and reduce the science-based evaluation in the approval process.
And that would create an unfair advantage for foreign competition, he says. “You could have the same type of crop being registered in the United States and not registered in Canada because of our criteria which would give U.S. competitors an advantage.
Countries in Europe with a sensitivity to genetically modified products could use the legislation as a “non tariff” barrier, he adds.
“Given the criteria they’re talking about, this may shut off the whole development of technology just because that one market isn’t accepting to a new technology,” says Senft. “But what about other markets that would be accepting? If you can’t register it, you can’t sell it.”
He says several farm groups who are opposed to bill C-474, including the Grain Farmers, plan to lobby the Agricultural Standing Committee on the issue.
The bill has been sent to the committee for further study. The committee can amend the bill and send it back to the House with changes or recommend that it shouldn’t proceed. BF
— with files from Susan Mann
Comments
It would appear in their attempt to co-tow to big business the Grain Farmers of Ontario didn't bother to read the bill in question. Considering the economic harm to farmers if something goes wrong should be a no-brainer - and would be a benefit to their members. All you need to do is look out west to Triffid flax and RR Canola and see what can happen to farmers markets and their livlihoods if things go wrong. And they go wrong all the time.
And this bit about 'science-based' is funny. There is no science based approach currently. Basic science means peer-reviewed research. That does not happen at all. It is all secret and the companies are taken at their word. Science-based would actually be a refreshing change.
You are so right...it's crap.
Given this is a subject of considerable significance for the future success of the producers, one has to wonder did the GFO work from a directive or guiding principal of resolutions or upon personal opinion? 'Science-based'has only been as creditable as the finances of influence are proportionate to political approvals. With several board members directly involved with the seed industry what conflict of interests were declared?
How come the price of canadian flax dropped in value from $10.00 a bushel to $2.00 a bushel when it was discovered our flax was contaminated with G.E. seeds.
If we were to always pass technology based on perception instead of science, we would not have cell phones because of the perceived radioactivity, apples would be labelled hazardous because of the toxic seeds within, peanut butter would be pulled off the shelf...
Get real.
And yet people complain that they want to drink raw milk, which by the way, has killed young children.
Get real.
Funny cars have killed kids to . Bet you still drive one
Post new comment