|
|
 
|
Bayer refuses to accept liability for its GM crops
(Wednesday, June 25, 2003 -- CropChoice news) -- From a news release.
The Network of Concerned Farmers (Australia) have expressed disappointment that Bayer Cropscience has indicated they have no intention to accept costs and liabilities for the control of their product. Bayer Cropscience refused a request to withdraw their license application for genetically modified canola until this issue was resolved.
"If Bayer CropScience was so confident that there will be no problem with
their product, they would not be objecting to accepting the cost and
liability for the control of it." said Julie Newman NFC spokesperson and WA
farmer.
"We are faced with a situation where the GM industry is not prepared to
bear the costs and liabilities associated with introduction and control of
the GM product and have drafted management plans to put this responsibility
on to non-GM growers. Non-GM growers are certainly not prepared to
subsidise companies such as Bayer Cropscience and Monsanto; these companies
make this product and they must be totally responsible for it."
"On release, Australia will lose its non-GM status And it will be extremely
expensive for non-GM growers to verify a crop as non-GM. Non-GM growers
must not be forced to market as GM due to these excessive costs and
liabilities. Non-GM is a preferred market and the GM industry must not be
allowed to deprive us of our chosen markets."
"We can only co-exist if we maintain our national non-GM status and ensure
the GM industry is 100% responsible for total containment of the GM canola
and all associated costs and liabilities. This must include containerising
on farm, a strict testing regime for neighbouring crops, serious fines for
non-compliance and a contingency fund for compensation." "If the company
will not accept responsibility for its product, it's time the Government
imposed legislation to ensure they do."
_____________
The Network of Concerned Farmers tabled the following letter:
Susie O'Neill
12th June, 2003
Re: Request to withdraw license application for Invigor Canola
Dear Susie,
As Bayer Cropscience is well aware, there are many unresolved issues still
in dispute regarding the practicalities for commercial release of Invigor
Canola.
Unfortunately the Federal legislation may allow the OGTR to approve the
commercial release of Invigor Canola prior to the appropriate State
legislations being in place and prior to the agricultural industry being
prepared and able to manage these crops. It is imperative that no sector of
industry should be faced with unmanageable problems with the introduction
of any new crop.
Contamination of non-GM seed by GM crops is considered uncontrollable and
yet it appears the cost and liability for controlling contamination has
been allocated to the non-GM growers.
As a network representing non-GM growers, we refuse to accept any costs or
liabilities for attempting to control the contamination of a GM crop we do
not want.
We therefore insist that, in accordance with normal business practise,
Bayer Cropscience accept the costs and liabilities for the control of their
product.
If Bayer Cropscience refuse to accept this, we consider the release of
Bayer Cropscience Invigor Canola should not progress until there is a party
willing to accept these costs and liabilities.
The Network of Concerned Farmers hereby requests that Bayer Cropscience
temporarily withdraw the application to the Office of the Gene Technology
Regulator for license of Invigor Canola until these serious issues are
resolved.
As the Regulator is expected to make a final decision within weeks, we
consider it a matter of urgency that you make your decision public within 7
days.
Yours faithfully,
Julie Newman, Network of Concerned Farmers
(
www.non-gm-farmers.com)
-------------
19 June, 2003 Update: Bayer Cropscience have responded to our letter and
although the details of the letter were marked confidential, they have
responded with the following press release on 20, June 2003:
Bayer Cropscience has responded in writing to the Network of Concerned
Farmers (NCF) request to withdraw InVigor hybrid canola from the regulatory
process of the Office of Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR).
The NCF presented a letter demanding the withdrawal of the InVigor hybrid
canola submission at the end of a Canberra meeting arranged by Bayer
CropScience last week. A joint communique was issued at the end of the
meeting signifying constructive discussions and a willingness to continue
dialogue.
In the response, Ms Susie O'Neill stated that Bayer CropScience was unable
to withdraw the application for commercial release of InVigor hybrid canola
for a number of reasons including maintaining good faith and trust in the
federal regulatory system for GM crops.
Ms O'Neill said "To withdraw our licence at this time would show a lack of
confidence in both our product and in the OGTR, neither of which we would
see as being warranted."
"Bayer CropScience strongly disagrees with the Network's assertion that
"contamination" is "considered uncontrollable". Whilst we respect this
partisan position, it is clearly contrary to the vast body of scientific
evidence, trial outcomes and experience, said Ms O'Neill.
Bayer CropScience noted that the NCF's greater concern lies with issues of
liability which Bayer believes can be addressed through the avenues
governed by contracts and common law.
"Thresholds and stewardship programs for GM and non GM crops also
effectively deal with liabilities, Ms O'Neill explained.
"Thresholds and tolerances, for example, for weed seeds and pesticide
residues are standard practice for non-GM crops produced today to meet
marketing specifications. Whilst further clarification of GM threshold
levels in non-GM grain, consistent with global trade requirements are
progressing, Australia's major export markets for canola all accept GM
grain today.
"Through grower training programs on InVigor hybrid canola and the
coexistence principles developed by industry, farmers will be able to
produce the crops of their choice without impacting on each others farming
system.
Ms O'Neill also explained that OGTR approval for InVigor hybrid canola,
should it proceed, is not the end of the issue for commercialisation as
various State Governments have, or are considering, introducing
moratoriums. "Whilst Bayer CropScience does not see the need for
moratoroiums to be introduced in Australia, we are committed to working
with State Governments to ensure they have confidence in markets and trade,
before moving ahead", she said.
Bayer CropScience announced last week that no commercialisation would
occur in Australia in 2003, but trial programs would continue, as they had
for a number of years. Bayer CropScience thanked the NCF for their letter
and welcomed the opportunity to engage with all groups in this debate.
------------
Further information regarding Bayers reply:
Markets: Using a 5 year averages from 97-01, our largest customer China
(37%) has not yet approved GM canola and its tightened regulation requires
a guarantee of the product to health and the environment. When even the
American FDA will not guarantee this, will our marketers sign such a deal?
Japan (29%) have expressed preference for non-GM and European Union (13%)
are rejecting GM's. Both China and EU propose to introduce labelling of
oils which will have a serious impact on markets as retailers will be
reluctant to stock GM. It should not be up to the GM industry to make
decisions restricting non-GM growers rights to market on the preferred
non-GM market.
Cost: Why should farmers who wish to market on the non-GM growers be
expected to be responsible for paying an estimated 10 - 20% of the product
value to provide the necessary segregation, identity preservation and
traceability system required?
Liability: Contracts in use, lack of established thresholds, the Trade
Practises Act and the proposed stewardship programs clearly indicate that
if a product is guaranteed as non-GM, it must contain no GM product and if
it does, the non-GM grower will be liable for that contamination. Bayer may
consider this acceptable but non-GM growers do not.
Contamination uncontrollable?: The segregated certified non-GM seed in
Canada has been tested and 95% of samples found to be contaminated with
over half above certification standards. Some growers are using 2km buffer
zones which makes a mockery of the Australian 5 metre buffer zone proposal
(or 400 metres for certified seed).
In the well publicised case of Monsanto vs Schmeisser (March 2001) Judge
MacKay concluded while considering an injunction "(130). to restrain the
growing of Roundup Ready canola, would be impossible to comply with in
light of the uncontrollable spread of the patented gene."
Canadian Experience: The Canadian Farmers Union is calling "for governments
to hold genetic modification companies accountable for the costs their
products create for other farmers and the general public."
Network of Concerned Farmers (Australia) Media Release,
http://www.non-gm-farmers.com , 23 June 2003 | |
