Having problems with message search?
INDUSTRY LEADERS BETRAYING FARMERS
The Network of Concerned Farmers (NCF) is warning Industry leaders that
they should not be ignoring the economic wellbeing of farmers in their
personal support of GM crops. The NCF claim industry leaders are betraying
farmers to side with the GM companies.
"We are being sold out by our industry leaders and they should be held
accountable for accepting liability on behalf of farmers," said Juliet
McFarlane, canola grower from Young, NSW.
"Why are existing policies being ignored? Why are ex Monsanto managers and
GM companies now actively working with farm lobby groups to evolve
policies and strategies? This is coercing industry unity to force
additional costs on farmers." (Ref 1)
"The GM industry must be laughing at our industry leaders. The GM benefits
are just not there to pay for the multitudes of parasites wanting to
profit from GM introduction."
The NCF claim that State lobby groups such as NSW Farmers, WA Farmers,
GRDC, AWB and GCA are making statements that clearly oppose the policies
and constitutions of their organisations. (Ref 2)
"If these organisations followed their policies, there must be proof of an
economic advantage, a guarantee that segregation will meet market demand
and a guarantee that existing farmers will not be adversely affected.
Instead, these issues are being ignored with an attitude that allowing GM
contamination without risk management will resolve the issue."
Although there is nothing set in legislation, the Primary Industries
Ministerial Council recently approved the setting of tolerance levels for
GM crops. The NCF state there is an industry led push for commercial sized
coexistence trials which they feel is a deliberate attempt to worsen
contamination.
"If the industry can't control contamination when it is prohibited, what
is going to happen if they are allowed to grow thousands of hectares of GM
canola with little or no restrictions?"
"Farmer profitability is already being eroded by additional expensive
testing costs and market risks associated with an acceptance of tolerance
levels. If industry leaders accept commercial release under the guise of
"coexistence trials", the costs will increase further as farmers will need
to adopt an expensive identity preservation system," explained Mrs
McFarlane.
ABARE estimated the identity preservation system as $35/tonne (or 10-15%
of the gross value of the product) to maintain a 1% tolerance level. The
system involves a rigorous quality assurance system where farmers ensure
they have taken every step to avoid contamination with GM.
"All farmers are expected to pay more to allow a few selfish hyped up
farmers to find out for themselves that they have been misled by an
expensive propaganda campaign that relies more on slamming opposition than
providing factual data."
"If the science of GM is as flawed as their debate, we will have some real
problems in the future."
- END -
Contact:
Juliet McFarlane NSW 02 63822509
Julie Newman WA 08 98711562 or 08 98711644
Geoffrey Carracher Vic 03 53866261
Network of Concerned Farmers www.non-gm-farmers.com
Reference 1:
1.1. West Australian Farmers Federation Press Release
Heavily lobbied and admittance that current existing varieties not better
than conventional varieties:
http://www.non-gm-farmers.com/news_details.asp?ID=2514
Extract: "WAFarmers has been recently lobbied by the major players in GM
technology and they have made it clear that further trials in WA will not
happen unless there is a clear path to market for their product. Nor are
they likely to conduct trials until such time as they can be confident of
a new seed variety that will clearly demonstrate benefits over existing
conventionally bred varieties. In effect, if all barriers were cleared
today, it would be two to three years before trials were recommenced."
1.2. Quote from David Hudson's (ex Monsanto's GM crops manager) submission
to the Gene Tech Act Review.
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/wcms/publishing.nsf/Content/EE07F6CC6BBFA835CA257065000A3B60/$File/sga_070.pdf
David has been actively engaged in the evolution of the grains and seed
industries policies and strategies for the introduction of agbiotech
products for Australia, having active involvement in the development of
policies for the Gene Technology Grains Committee, Australian Seeds
Federation, Australian Oilseeds Federation and more recently Ausbiotech,
and the Grains Council of Australia.
1.3. Agrifood Awareness, chiefly funded by Avcare (the chemical industry)
is a major contributor to policy of farm organisations.
Reference 2:
Extracts from Policies: See
http://www.non-gm-farmers.com/news_details.asp?ID=2517
2.2 NCF National Spokesperson, Julie Newman claimed the Grains Council of
Australia (GCA) submission to the Gene Technology Act review did not
comply with the policies of the organisations GCA represented. The Grains
Council of Australia (GCA) responded by threatening legal action but Mrs
Newman has not heard from the lawyers since she gave detailed references
to the GCA. The GCA submission opposed a strict liability regime and
promoted removing the States ability to impose moratoriums based on
economic or market risk. (more details
http://www.non-gm-farmers.com/news_details.asp?ID=2419 )
they should not be ignoring the economic wellbeing of farmers in their
personal support of GM crops. The NCF claim industry leaders are betraying
farmers to side with the GM companies.
"We are being sold out by our industry leaders and they should be held
accountable for accepting liability on behalf of farmers," said Juliet
McFarlane, canola grower from Young, NSW.
"Why are existing policies being ignored? Why are ex Monsanto managers and
GM companies now actively working with farm lobby groups to evolve
policies and strategies? This is coercing industry unity to force
additional costs on farmers." (Ref 1)
"The GM industry must be laughing at our industry leaders. The GM benefits
are just not there to pay for the multitudes of parasites wanting to
profit from GM introduction."
The NCF claim that State lobby groups such as NSW Farmers, WA Farmers,
GRDC, AWB and GCA are making statements that clearly oppose the policies
and constitutions of their organisations. (Ref 2)
"If these organisations followed their policies, there must be proof of an
economic advantage, a guarantee that segregation will meet market demand
and a guarantee that existing farmers will not be adversely affected.
Instead, these issues are being ignored with an attitude that allowing GM
contamination without risk management will resolve the issue."
Although there is nothing set in legislation, the Primary Industries
Ministerial Council recently approved the setting of tolerance levels for
GM crops. The NCF state there is an industry led push for commercial sized
coexistence trials which they feel is a deliberate attempt to worsen
contamination.
"If the industry can't control contamination when it is prohibited, what
is going to happen if they are allowed to grow thousands of hectares of GM
canola with little or no restrictions?"
"Farmer profitability is already being eroded by additional expensive
testing costs and market risks associated with an acceptance of tolerance
levels. If industry leaders accept commercial release under the guise of
"coexistence trials", the costs will increase further as farmers will need
to adopt an expensive identity preservation system," explained Mrs
McFarlane.
ABARE estimated the identity preservation system as $35/tonne (or 10-15%
of the gross value of the product) to maintain a 1% tolerance level. The
system involves a rigorous quality assurance system where farmers ensure
they have taken every step to avoid contamination with GM.
"All farmers are expected to pay more to allow a few selfish hyped up
farmers to find out for themselves that they have been misled by an
expensive propaganda campaign that relies more on slamming opposition than
providing factual data."
"If the science of GM is as flawed as their debate, we will have some real
problems in the future."
- END -
Contact:
Juliet McFarlane NSW 02 63822509
Julie Newman WA 08 98711562 or 08 98711644
Geoffrey Carracher Vic 03 53866261
Network of Concerned Farmers www.non-gm-farmers.com
Reference 1:
1.1. West Australian Farmers Federation Press Release
Heavily lobbied and admittance that current existing varieties not better
than conventional varieties:
http://www.non-gm-farmers.com/news_details.asp?ID=2514
Extract: "WAFarmers has been recently lobbied by the major players in GM
technology and they have made it clear that further trials in WA will not
happen unless there is a clear path to market for their product. Nor are
they likely to conduct trials until such time as they can be confident of
a new seed variety that will clearly demonstrate benefits over existing
conventionally bred varieties. In effect, if all barriers were cleared
today, it would be two to three years before trials were recommenced."
1.2. Quote from David Hudson's (ex Monsanto's GM crops manager) submission
to the Gene Tech Act Review.
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/wcms/publishing.nsf/Content/EE07F6CC6BBFA835CA257065000A3B60/$File/sga_070.pdf
David has been actively engaged in the evolution of the grains and seed
industries policies and strategies for the introduction of agbiotech
products for Australia, having active involvement in the development of
policies for the Gene Technology Grains Committee, Australian Seeds
Federation, Australian Oilseeds Federation and more recently Ausbiotech,
and the Grains Council of Australia.
1.3. Agrifood Awareness, chiefly funded by Avcare (the chemical industry)
is a major contributor to policy of farm organisations.
Reference 2:
Extracts from Policies: See
http://www.non-gm-farmers.com/news_details.asp?ID=2517
2.2 NCF National Spokesperson, Julie Newman claimed the Grains Council of
Australia (GCA) submission to the Gene Technology Act review did not
comply with the policies of the organisations GCA represented. The Grains
Council of Australia (GCA) responded by threatening legal action but Mrs
Newman has not heard from the lawyers since she gave detailed references
to the GCA. The GCA submission opposed a strict liability regime and
promoted removing the States ability to impose moratoriums based on
economic or market risk. (more details
http://www.non-gm-farmers.com/news_details.asp?ID=2419 )
Caroline Collard
World's first fully certified organic skin, body, oral and health care products
Win a Yahoo! Vespa NEW - Yahoo! Cars has 3 Vespa LX125s to be won Enter Now!
Offline 
Send Email