Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

F.O.E.UK realfood news

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Real Food News May 2003

 

GM-free success spreads

Dorset County Council joined the growing list of local authorities

expressing concern about the commercialisation of GM (see 24 April

2003), pledging to keep services such as school meals free of GM, and

calling on the South West Regional Assembly to adopt a position on

GM.

Warwickshire County Council then passed a stronger GM-free motion

with

no opposition (see 20 May 2003) to keep the county free of GM crops

and

GM food.

 

GM - like it or lump it!

The Government's GM advisors, the AEBC, has warned that it would be

difficult or impossible in some areas to guarantee GM-free food if GM

crops are commercialised in the UK (see 28 April 2003). But the

Government is urging UK MEPs to vote in favour of contamination of

our

food by voting for a one per cent contamination threshold in the

upcoming EU labelling and traceability legislation (see 9 May 2003).

It

also emerged that the Government may allow GM to be grown in the UK

regardless of public opinion and the public debate (see 19 May 2003).

However, this could all become academic, as the USA intends to force

GM

down our throats no matter what anyone wants (see 13 May 2003). They

have filed a complaint with the WTO about the current EU moratorium

on

GM, and if the WTO rules in their favour it could force the EU to

accept

GM food or face trade sanctions. You can take part in our online

action

to email the US Ambassador at:

http://www/campaigns/global_trade/press_for_change/email_us_embassy/i

ndex.html

 

Curb supermarket power

The Competition Commission listened to our views on why the Safeway

takeover should not be permitted (see 30 April 2003), along with

Sainsbury's, Tesco's, Asda's and Morrison's views on why they would

be

the best people to take it over. Allowing any of the supermarket

bidders

to take over Safeway would put three-quarters of grocery shopping in

the

hands of just four companies. Our views were backed up by a Liberal

Democrat report, " Checking out the Supermarkets II " (see 8 May 2003)

highlighting the lack of Government action addressing the problems

associated with supermarket power. Don't forget you can take part in

our

online action to stop the Safeway takeover at:

http://www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/real_food/press_for_change/mp/index.ht

ml

 

Thank you for your support and help on our campaigns,

 

Liz Wright

Friends of the Earth Real Food & Farming Campaign Assistant

________________________________

 

20 May 2003

 

Warwickshire goes GM-free

 

Warwickshire County Council voted to go GM-free, joining a growing

protest against GM crops at local authority level across the country.

The decision has been warmly welcomed by Friends of the Earth who

launched a GM-Free Britain Campaign in October last year.

 

In a full meeting, Warwickshire County Council expressed concern

about

the safety of GM crops and foods, and in addition to its ban on

growing

GM crops on council land, voted to keep services free of GM foods

and

to

call on the Secretary of State to provide the county with legal

protection as a GM-free area. The motion was passed without

opposition.

 

Calls for GM-free areas are growing. Cornwall, South Gloucestershire

and

South Hams District Council voted to go GM-free earlier this year.

Devon

County Council has stated its opposition to GM trials, and along with

Dorset has called on the South West Regional Assembly to take a

position

on GM. GM-free votes has also taken place in a number of town and

district councils.

 

" Friends of the Earth is delighted that Warwickshire County Council

has

voted to go GM-free, " said Friends of the Earth GM Campaigner, Clare

Oxborrow. " Around Britain there is growing opposition to GM crops and

food. This decision sends a strong message to the Government that

local

people don't want their food, farms and environment threatened by GM

crops. It is time now for the Government to listen and not allow GM

crops to be commercially grown in the UK. "

 

The Government is expected to decide later this year whether or not

to

allow GM crops to be commercially grown across the UK.

Commercialisation

risks widespread GM contamination of food, crops and the environment.

Consumer opposition remains high with 56 per cent opposing GM foods

in

the latest poll, and a MORI survey published in October showed that

57

per cent do not want GM crops to be commercially grown across the

UK.

________________________________

 

19 May 2003

 

Government may ignore public opinion on GM crops

 

Friends of the Earth reacted angrily to comments by Environment

Minister

Michael Meacher suggesting that the Government may allow GM crops to

be

grown commercially in the UK regardless of public opinion. The

Government's public consultation on GM crops begins in June.

 

Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Farming today, Mr Meacher said that a ban

on

GM crops would be illegal unless there is scientific proof that they

harm people or the environment. Last week the US made a formal

complaint

to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) over the EU's de-facto

moratorium

on issuing new GM licenses.

 

Major issues such as the co-existence of GM and non-GM crops and

liability for economic and environmental harm are still being hotly

debated in Europe and the UK.

 

" The public has made it perfectly clear that they do not want to eat

GM

food, " said Friends of the Earth's GM campaigner, Pete

Riley. " Allowing

GM crops to be commercially grown would threaten our food, farming

and

environment with GM pollution, and take away people's right to say

no

to

GMOs (genetically modified organisms). There is genuine scientific

uncertainty surrounding the potential impacts these crops have on

people, the environment and the food chain. But this Government is so

pro-GM it chooses to ignore them.

 

" Next month, the Government is launching its public debate on GM

crops.

But if it is to have any credibility, ministers must guarantee

beforehand that if the public say they don't want GM crops, the

Government will not give them the commercial go-ahead. Without that

guarantee, there seems little point in debating the issue. "

________________________________

 

14 May 2003

 

GM trade war - who decides what we eat?

 

Friends of the Earth urged the European Union to staunchly defend the

public's right to exercise choice over GM food, following the

announcement that the United States has filed a complaint with the

World

Trade Organisation (WTO) over Europe's de-facto moratorium. And if

the

UK Government does not strongly defend the European Union case, it

will

render the UK's own public debate on the future of the GM food

meaningless.

 

The process for dealing with WTO disputes is complex and slow but a

consultation period will stretch over the summer, with Europe not

due

to

make its first written submission until November, leaving the dispute

hanging not only over the UK's public consultation, but also the WTO

Ministerial in Cancun, Mexico, scheduled to take place in September.

And

the secretive nature of the WTO dispute resolution process will mean

that public concerns will not be voiced and cannot even be

considered.

 

If the US is successful, the dispute panel ruling is binding and the

EU

will be forced to either alter its policy toward GM crops or face

economic sanctions across a range of sectors. Friends of the Earth is

concerned that the US action, almost certainly a result of pressure

from

the biotech industry, could remove the public's right to choose on GM

food.

 

" The Bush White House and American business interests should not have

the right to make decisions about what people in Europe get to eat, "

said Friends of the Earth Policy and Campaigns Director, Liana

Stupples.

" But the current WTO system means that this could be the case. The

British Government and the European Union must act to defend our

right

to eat what we choose.

 

" The British public do not want GM food and they have made this clear

time and time again. The United States has become the bully in the

world

playground, forcing through the big business agenda at the expense of

democracy and people power. This action against the EU could be just

the

first assault on consumer rights. "

________________________________

 

13 May 2003

 

US files WTO GM complaint

 

The United States administration has announced that it is bringing a

case in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) against the European Union

over genetically modified food. The US has been joined by Australia,

Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru and

Uruguay. The US will argue that the current EU moratorium on the

commercial development of GM foods is an " illegal " trade barrier

under

WTO rules. But Friends of the Earth is warning the move is the

latest

in

a series of attempts by the US to block other countries' decisions to

protect their environment, human health and social standards.

 

The move could bring the full force of WTO sanctions to bear in

order

to

force GM food into European markets regardless of the wishes of

European

consumers. The US is likely to attempt to prevent any effective

labelling of food derived from GM ingredients.

 

US Trade Representative, Robert Zoellick has threatened a WTO case

over

GM on several occasions, most recently in January this year, but is

believed to have been told by the White House to back off during

attempts to secure European support for the invasion of Iraq. The US

Administration has been lobbied heavily by GM companies such as

Monsanto

and by big US farming interests such as the National Corn Growers

Association.

 

WTO procedures are complex and secretive, and have been heavily

criticised by environmentalists and others for their pro-business

bias.

In particular, WTO rules are hostile to the fundamental precautionary

principle.

 

" This looks like the moment of truth for the future of GM food in

Europe, and future trade relations between the European Union and

United

States, " said Friends of the Earth Policy Director, Liana

Stupples. " It

is clear that this US Administration, backed by some of the richest

and

most powerful lobbyists in US politics, is determined to use the

secretive, biased and undemocratic procedures of the WTO to bulldoze

through attempts by other states to set minimum environmental, social

and health standards. If this attempt succeeds, the US will force GM

foods onto European markets regardless of the wishes of consumers.

 

" The European Commission and national governments must find the

courage

to stand up to this outrageous piece of bullying. Decisions over the

future of GM crops in Europe must not be made in the George Bush

White

House. Friends of the Earth will step up its GM campaign to fight

this

outrageous challenge to Europe's right to say no to GMOs. "

________________________________

 

9 May 2003

 

Government urges MEPs to vote for GM food

 

The Government is asking UK Members of the European Parliament

(MEPs)

to

vote in favour of the GM contamination of our food and against the

widespread labelling of food containing traces of GM materials,

Friends

of the Earth revealed. The advice comes ahead of the Government's

'public debate' on GM foods.

 

MEPs are voting on new European legislation to strengthen the

labelling

of food containing GM-derived ingredients. Currently food containing

at

least one per cent of GM DNA must be labelled. The new proposals

would

strengthen the legislation by:

 

- Reducing the GM labelling threshold. MEPs backed a 0.5 per cent

labelling threshold at the first reading last year, but the Council

of

Ministers increased it to 0.9 per cent. MEPs can still vote for the

0.5

per cent threshold, though Friends of the Earth has been calling for

the

limit to be set at the lowest detectable level (currently 0.1 per

cent).

 

- Increasing the scope of the legislation to include GM derivatives,

which don't contain DNA, such as oil and lecithin. This would be

achieved through a comprehensive 'traceability' regime.

 

- Extending it to cover animal feed.

 

However, the Government is urging MEPs to weaken the proposals by

voting

to maintain the current GM threshold of one per cent. The

recommendation

is contained in a briefing to MEPs from the Food Standards Agency

(FSA)

and Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).

The

briefing claims thresholds below one per cent are unenforceable. But

the

Government's own Central Science Laboratory has confirmed that a

limit

of detection of 0.1 per cent is verifiable.

 

The briefing comes hot on the heels of the FSA's own Citizen's Jury,

held in Slough in early April, the 15 jurors unanimously recommended

comprehensive labelling of any food containing GM ingredients or

derived

from GM crops including " a GM logo " .

 

EU citizens strongly support comprehensive labelling, with the latest

polls indicating that 94 per cent back strong EU legislation to

maintain

choice for consumers.

 

" Consumers have made it perfectly clear that they want comprehensive

GM

labelling so that they can avoid food containing GM ingredients, "

said

Friends of the Earth's GM Campaigner, Pete Riley. " But once again

the

UK

Government is ignoring public concern on this issue. It is urging

MEPs

to weaken new European legislation on GM food labels, and reduce the

ability of consumers to choose what they eat. So much for the

openness

of the Government's GM public debate, to be launched next month. The

role of the Food Standards Agency must also be questioned. It claims

to

be listening to consumer concerns, but when it comes to GM

labelling,

it

seem to represent the biotech industry. The major supermarkets are

already working to a 0.1 per cent threshold. "

________________________________

 

8 May 2003

 

Government failing to regulate supermarkets, says new report

 

Friends of the Earth welcomed the publication of Checking out the

supermarkets II, a report by Liberal Democrat MP Colin Breed into the

practices and problems of supermarket retailing. Friends of the Earth

said that it highlighted the lack of Government action to address the

problems associated with the dominance of the big supermarket

chains.

 

The report, which comes as the Competition Commission grapples with

the

pros and cons of allowing Safeway to be taken over by a rival

supermarket, describes the range of problems already associated with

the

concentration of power in this sector. It also shows how supermarkets

have been allowed to grow at the expense of the public interest,

undermining local economies, eroding consumer choice and creating

problems for people with no access to a car. The plight of UK farmers

struggling to make a living against the unreasonable demands of the

supermarkets is also stressed.

 

One policy area which comes under particular criticism in the report

is

the planning system. Although Planning Policy Guidance (PPG6) was

revised in 1996, with the specific objective of protecting town

centres,

Breed's report points out that the destruction of local economies has

continued apace. The call for an overhaul of planning guidance to

deal

with the dominance of the big chains and their incursion into every

aspect of retailing is again very well timed, with PPG6 currently up

for

revision and a new Planning Bill progressing through Parliament.

 

Speaking at the report's launch, Friends of the Earth Real Food

Campaigner, Sandra Bell described how Asda/Wal-Mart is making a

mockery

of planning guidance by exploiting a loophole in the planning

system.

By

installing mezzanine floors in existing Asda stores for non-food

goods,

the company does not even have to submit a planning application to

the

local authority. This leaves the local authority powerless to assess

the

impact of the expansion on local shops or traffic levels, and local

communities with no say in the development.

 

" This report is very timely, " said Sandra Bell. " The Government is

currently grappling with the pros and cons of a Safeway takeover and

the

updating of our planning system. Politicians must sit up and take

notice

of this litany of negative impacts from the rise of the big

supermarkets. If supermarkets are so beneficial, why have we ended up

with more food poverty, struggling local economies, farmers leaving

the

land, and less choice of where to shop? "

http://www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/food_and_biotechnology

---

-

this message is from realfood

to from realfood, send a message to majordomo

with

realfood <your email address>

in the message body

---------

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...