Wednesday, February 27, 2002

Friends,

      Sam Anderson's posting of the "Joint Statement on the Mexican
Gentically Modified Maize Scandal" just showed up. In addition, I got a
discouraging news release from the ETC Group, which follows:

From: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Tue 2/26/2002 9:22 PM
To: George Salzman

News Release:
Wednesday, February 27th 2002

Neither Early Warning nor Early Listening - What the CGIAR is Not Doing:

Silent Science

If you don't have anything nice to say don't say anything at all?When the
policy committee of the world's most important agricultural science network
met last week, they evaded all the tough questions related to transgenic
maize in Mexico - the crop's center of genetic diversity. Last year, and
again last month, the Mexican Environment Ministry confirmed that farmers'
maize varieties in at least two states had been contaminated with DNA from
genetically modified maize.

"Hot tamale" dropped:The uproar over the Mexican transgenic maize scandal
has derailed industry plans to get EU governments to abandon their de facto
moratorium on GM(genetically-modified) crops and produce.Brussels had
hoped to raise the issue during the EU's Barcelona round in March.But as
Nature Biotechnology magazine reported in February, jitters over the Mexican
debacle were causing both industry and pro-biotech governments to reconsider
pressing for a decision that might go against them.The joint statement
issued by more than 140 civil society organizations (CSOs) on February 19th
reinforced their concern.The moratorium issue will not come up until the
EU's October meeting. See: http://www.etcgroup.org/article.asp?newsid=298 to
view the joint statement.

Meanwhile, the Genetic Resources Policy Committee of the CGIAR (Consultative
Group on International Agricultural Research) met in Los Banos, Philippines
February 20-22nd.The CGIAR speaks for the 16 International Agricultural
Research Centres responsible for the Green Revolution of the 1960s and 70s.
One of the 16 centres, CIMMYT (the International Maize and Wheat Improvement
Centre in Mexico) has been embroiled in the contamination debate largely
because it has the world's most important maize gene bank.CIMMYT is not
regarded as a cause of GM contamination nor is its bank contaminated.But
CIMMYT and CGIAR not only develop new plant varieties and conserve genetic
diversity,they are purported to offer scientific leadership and an early
warning system when problems arise."After listening to the Mexican
Government's alarm bells for almost half a year, maybe our genetic guardians
needan early listening system," suggests the ETC group's Pat Mooney.

Said and not said:Among others, farmers' organizations and governments
looked to the CGIAR meeting to bring clarity to the controversy surrounding
GM pollution in a center of diversity and to suggest steps that could be
taken in keeping with the precautionary principle adopted by governments as
part of the Biosafety Protocol.In the end, the CGIAR declined to act.The
research network was more concerned for its institutional safety than in
biosafety.The committee concluded that it did not have enough information
to act; that further studies were needed (but declined to suggest whose
responsibility they should be), on the implications of GM contamination for
genetic diversity , gene banks, and intellectual property. The committee
only gently opined that FAO, UNEP, or UNESCO, (anyone but CGIAR) might want
to look into the matter.Finally, they congratulated the Mexican government
and CIMMYTfor their transparency in dealing with the issue.

Early warning denied: The committee was expected to cut through the
confusion surrounding methodologies for GM testing and provide an early
warning for the international community.Instead, they chose to use the
manufactured furor over methodologies as a reason not to act.Farmers and
CSOs had expected the committee to rise above the academic squabble and
simply address the direct statements of the Mexican Government confirming
that the countryside was contaminated.The meeting will be remembered for
the CGIAR's silence and passivity.

- Field contamination ignored:The committee would not state that
regardless of the debate over test methodologies, Mesoamerican governments
should enact the precautionary principle and assume that there is maize
contamination;

- Moratorium support sidestepped:The committee turned down a proposal to
commend the Mexican government's current moratorium on genetically-modified
crops and, instead, "noted" the policy;

- Precautionary principle discounted:While acknowledging the importance of
the situation, the committee refused to follow the recent U.S. precedent of
invoking the precautionary principle to restrict the planting of GM cotton
in some areas of the United States where wild or feral cotton is found. "The
U.S. is hardly a center of diversity for cotton and cotton is much less
vulnerable to GM pollution than maize," notes ETC's Silvia Ribeiro in
Mexico;

- Gene banks endangered:Despite a general consensus that field
contamination will lead to gene bank contamination, the committee and CIMMYT
did not advise bank directors to take any specific actions or propose any
specific policies or procedures;

- Intellectual property policies compromised:Although it vaguely noted
that there might be patent issues involved, the committee did not decide to
formally notify the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) that GM
contamination involving in-trust material held in CGIAR gene banks could
compromise access to bank accessions;

- Biodiversity Convention dismissed:The committee rejected a proposal that
it ask the Convention on Biological Diversity to look into the issue of
transgenic contamination in a Centre of Genetic Diversity even though the UN
Convention has stressed the importance of such Centres and is meeting in
April;

- Farmers' Rights ignored:The committee did not respond to the request
that the CGIAR gene banks guarantee the continued access of farmers to
uncontaminated gene bank accessions.

"For the world's farmers, the CGIAR's attitude is very troubling", says
Mexico's Ernesto Ladron de Guevara, of the farmers' organization UNORCA,
"because the seeds they have in trust are the contribution of farmers of the
whole world with the understanding that the seeds remain the patrimony of
humankind. The CGIAR is obliged to ensure that farmers can obtain good
quality, patent-free and transgenic-free seeds from the gene bank
collections." Ladron deGuevara is also the representative of the Genetic
Resources Commission of Via Campesina.

Doctor Alejandro Nadal in Mexico City concludes, "CGIAR has failed to take
responsibility by ignoring that genetic contamination will eventually make
it very difficult or impossible to rejuvenatetheir seeds. By not calling
for a moratorium to stop the sources of contamination in Mexico, and by
failing to take steps to protect all centres of crop diversity, CGIAR is
contradicting the precautionary principle." Dr. Nadal is the director of the
Science and Technology Program at Colegio de Mexico.

The "protecting their bottoms" line: With the CGIAR planted firmly on its
own hands, many organizations that have signed the Joint Statement will take
the matter to the Convention on Biological Diversity when environment
ministers meet in The Hague from April 8th to 26th. The issue is also
bound to be discussed at the UN/FAO Committee on Food Security and at the
World Food Summit that will take place in Rome in early June."By that
time," Pat Mooney admits, "the obfuscations around methodologies will be
long past, and governments and CGIAR will have to discuss the real threat to
food security.The world will also want an explanation from the CGIAR as to
why they failed to provide farmers with an early warning."

For further information:

Silvia Ribeiro: [log in to unmask] (52) 5555-63-26-64 CST - Mexico City
Pat Roy Mooney:[log in to unmask] (204) 453-5259 CST - Winnipeg

Thank you for joining our mailing list and for your interest in our
organization.