Hi folks,
Issues associated with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are attaining
increasing political significance internationally. These matters generally
receive scant notice in mainstream US and Canadian newsmedia but they are
the subject of extensive public debate in many other countries.
The GMO Canadians are perhaps most familiar with is recombinant bovine
growth hormone (rBGH). This substance was recently banned in Canada
following Senate hearings which highlighted both the health risks posed by
rBGH and the attempts of senior members of Canada's civil service to
suppress public notice of these dangers. As a result of the Senate
proceedings some discussion of rBGH was generated nationally but the full
extent of GMO penetration (and the implications thereof) is poorly
understood in Canada.
Typically, governments everywhere are eager to promote GMOs arguing
variously that they will be a source of increased market share (this from
OECD states) or that they will help feed growing populations (this from
Third World nations.) In many instances, however, the citizenry remain
unconvinced and popular dissent has now several times forced politicians
to rethink their positions.
Many of the most encouraging developments have occurred in India. Last
fall KRRS, the Peasants Union of Karnataka state, located and burned GMO
crops throughout their region. Now a moratorium on the growing of GMOs has
been granted by the Supreme Court. The decision, handed down on February
23/99, arose from a petition put by Vandana Shiva (see
'India's High Court Stops Field Trials of Biotech Cotton').
The United Kingdom has also recently acted to limit the growing of GMOs.
The Guardian Weekly reported that, "Environment Minister, Michael Meacher,
gave an open-ended assurance that commercial growing would not be allowed
in Britain until the Government was convinced it did not damage the
environment and wildlife" (Feb. 28/99, 'Government puts GM crops on
hold').
This ban, which forbids GMO production with intent to sell, is not as
strong as the Indian interdict, which largely prohibits the planting of
GMOs even for experimental purposes. Nonetheless it represents
considerable progress for the growing anti-GMO lobby in the UK - and a
notable tergiversation on the part of 10 Downing Street. Tony Blair has
been a vocal and vociferous advocate of GMOs, going so far as to label the
Friends of the Earth "tyrants" for campaigning against GMOs, and to
criticize Prince Charles for championing organic agriculture.
If
there have been victories of late there have also been decided
setbacks. Perhaps the most notable is the failure to produce an
international Biosafety Protocol in the course of last week's multilateral
negotiations in Cartagena, Colombia.
The Protocol, which was conceived as an annex to the 1992 Convention on
Biological Diversity (CBD), was intended to ensure the safe transfer,
handling, use and disposal of GMOs. Agreement on the Protocol was found
amongst the majority of the 174 contracting parties of the CBD but it was
scuttled by opposition from a handful of countries. The dissenting few
included Canada as well as the US (the latter making itself felt even
though it could not vote on the Protocol, having never ratified the CBD).
Uncognizant as the majority of Canadians are of the fact, GMOs are being
pushed to the forefront of the global stage. On the one hand the
possibility of direct devestation presented by GMOs is very great : it is
quite literally impossible to predict the consequences of artificially
combining genetic material which could never combine in nature. On the
other the White House has evidently identified GMOs - and biotechnology
generally - as an efficient means of boosting American multinationals.
Canadians can play a pivotal role in this drama. Indeed, by default, we
already are : as in the case of the Biosafety Protocol, mentioned above,
the Canadian government tends to act as Washington's faithful sidekick
when GMOs are in question. As long as the Canadian public is quiet on the
issue Ottawa will have a free hand to assist the Us in its crusade to make
the world safe for Monsanto. Yet the rBGH affair shows that it is possible
to force the Canadian government to take action on biotechnology problems;
and if sufficient dissent against GMOs is aroused within the country
Ottawa will have a hard time supporting the US internationally on these
issues.
One aspect of getting our own house in order is identifying and dealing
with GMO crops being grown in Canada. Joan Russow, Leader of the Green
Party of Canada, has told me that she has managed to extract from the
federal Department of Agriculture the revelation that there are many such
crops across the country. She is presently trying to force the disclosure
of the sites' locations; when this information becomes available I will be
sure to pass it along.
---Antoni