The article below comes from the current issue of Farmers Weekly, which also contains the following Box on GM tolerance (p31):

Undeterred by EU rules processors like Cargill and ADM are developing storage and screening processes that allow them to meet some of the toughest GM tolerances in the world.

ADM already adheres to Europe's specifications, permitting no more than 0.9% of GM in its supplied corn. In three years time it says it will have sufficient infrastructure to meet tolerance levels as low as 0.01%.

"We can supply virtually all the markets in the world, including Europe and Japan and others with high standards" says Lynn Clarkson of ADM.

But he admits they can't meet North Korea's requirement of zero levels of GM material.
---

DEFRA's 'flawed' genetically modified crop proposals under fire from campaigners
by Paul Spackman Farmers Weekly, 30 October 2006 http://www.fwi.co.uk/Articles/2006/10/30/99128/DEFRA's+'flawed'+genetically+modified+crop+proposals+under+fire+from.html

DEFRA [the UK Government's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs] proposals to prevent gentically modified crops contaminating conventional and organic crops are "legally and fundamentally flawed", according to anti-GM campaigners.

In a joint response to the government's coexistence consultation, which closed on Friday 20 October, Friends of the Earth, the Soil Association and GM Freeze claimed some DEFRA proposals breached European law.

"The proposals are a thinly veiled attempt to introduce GM crops through the back door," said FoE spokeswoman Clare Oxborrow.

GM contamination

"Allowing routine, unlabelled, GM contamination of conventional and organic crops is not only unacceptable to the public, it is legally flawed too."

Former environment minister Michael Meacher said the consultation was an attempt to back the GM industry against public opinion and called on government to reject the coexistence plans.

"Instead of paving the way for GM crops to be grown in England, DEFRA secretary David Miliband must take on board the thousands of responses rejecting the government's GM contamination plans and put in place policies that protect GM-free food and truly promote his vision of sustainable farming."

Inaccuracies

But pro-GM farmer Bob Fiddaman, chairman of the Supply Chain Initiative on Modified Agricultural Crops, said the claims were inaccurate and as far as he was aware, DEFRA's lawyers were happy with the legality of the proposals. One of the main issues, he said, was the call for maximum contamination levels of 0.1%, instead of 0.9%.

"Even if you can test for, and detect GM contaminants, it doesn't mean it is harmful. If you look at other production legislation, you've got to have due diligence and certain standards, but it's never zero, which is effectively what they're demanding."

A DEFRA spokesman maintained that the coexistence proposals were legal. "We will give this consideration, but we are confident that our proposals are legally sound. GM crops will only be approved for commercial use after going through a very transparent assessment and decision-making process that is managed at EU level."

AREAS OF LEGAL CONCERN

*Coexistence measures should completely avoid GM contamination, not "minimise" it to an arbitrary 0.9% GM *Separation distance proposals are inadequate and are based on the assumption that contamination up to 0.9% is allowed *Coexistence rules need to include potential environmental and health issues alongside economic concerns *Coexistence measures should also protect crops not intended for the market place (eg from gardens to allotments) *Full statutory backing should be given to any measures (eg volunteer control) to help prevent unintended presence of GMs, not just separation distances *A public register of sites where GM crops are grown is required

Go to a Print friendly Page

Email this Article to a Friend

Back to the Archive