Biotechnology Working Group
 Though
not a formal caucus of the Network, the Biotechnology
Working Group is comprised of members of various
other caucuses with an interest in biotechnology.
ENGO concerns related to biotech are primarily
rooted not gene technology per se but in the socio-economic
impacts related to the privatization of the global
genome. Food security and the consolidation of
seed supplies, gene patents, molecular detection
techniques for GE plants, plants modified for
pharmaceutical purposes and the approval and labeling
of genetically modified foods are major policy
issues for workgroup members who also track the
policies of the Canadian Biotech Advisory Committee
(CBAC), and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency
of Agriculture and Agri-food Canada. Related to
these are trade issues under the Biosafety Protocol,
the World Trade Organization, and multi-lateral
discussions between trading blocks (i.e. Europe,
Japan, Africa, North & South America). Workgroup
members have spent significant effort building
networks with health food distributors, organic
growers and farmers concerned with gene technology
as it relates to export crops, with modified wheat
a focus of concern. The Agriculture Caucus also
has an interest in agricultural biotech.
Food Security
The issue of food security, particularly in the
developing world has become increasingly contentious
with some donor nations insisting on sending genetically
modified crops (i.e. the US), or in providing
"aid" by way of funding research institutes
to promote further technological manipulation
of staple crops. Workgroup members have expressed
concern that current forms of aid are not addressing
the key issues of economics and food distribution.
For more information contact:
GE Wheat
Developed jointly by the government of Canada
and Monsanto, GE wheat poses a serious threat
to Canada's global wheat market with key Japanese
and European customers refusing to buy GE products
and insisting on a segregation system to prevent
contamination. Canadian farmers have expressed
grave concern via the Canadian Wheat Board's appeal
to Monsanto to withdraw its application to the
federal government to certify GE Wheat. Meanwhile,
concern has been raised by the Royal Society,
among other civil interest groups, that the Canadian
government is in a conflict of interest in its
capacity as promoter and regulator of GE food
products. The Saskatchewan Organic Directorate
has launched a class action lawsuit to prevent
GE wheat from being certified, and in pursuit
of lost damages due to contamination of organic
crops such as canola. For more information, visit:
Gene Patents
Canada's patent laws, drafted long-before current gene technologies
were developed, are ill-equiped to address the ownership of modified
organisms. The challenges and concerns relating to biotech and
patent law are well exemplified in the recent Supreme Court of
Canada appeal regarding Harvard's University's application to
patent the Oncomouse — modified to induce cancer for research
purposes. The court found higher life forms, under current legislation,
are not subject to patent. A post-supreme court ENGO analysis
will soon be available. Read the recommendations
of the Canadian Biotech Advisory Committee. Also read the
CBAC's discussion document: Biotechnology
and Health Innovation: Opportunities and Challenges has been prepared
by the Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee
Molecular Detection Techniques for Plants with
Novel Traits
The federal government, under the leadership of the Canadian
Food Inspection Agency of Agriculture and Agri-food Canada has
been consulting on techniques for detecting plants with novel
traits. Reports to CEN indicate the participation of ENGOs has
been limited by notice, capacity, and lack of equitable representation
among stakeholder groups. More
information on this initiative.
Biosafety Protocol
The Biosafety Protocol aims to ensure safe and
secure trade of modified seed through tracking,
segregation and liability. Despite strong attempts
by exporter of GE crops, the protocol was ratified
in February 2002 in Montreal. The Protocol is
not yet in full force. The CEN has two ENGO representatives
to the federal government's Biosafety Protocol
Advisory Committee, and periodically oversees
the selection of an ENGO representative to participate
on the official Canadian Negotiating Team.
The current representatives to the BPAG are:
Greenpeace
Éric
Darier
Greenpeace
(514) 933-0021 poste 15
Canadian Environmental
Law Association
Michelle Swenarchuck
(416) 960-2284
Read
the full Protocol text and background.
View ENGO analysis
of the protocol, and ENGO recommendations regarding the required
regulatory framework to implement the protocol, attached as Biosafety
Regulations (PDF).
Now coming into force, the first Meeting of the Parties for the
Biosafety Protocol is scheduled for February 23 -27 2004, 2004
in Kuala Lumpur. Bradford Duplisea of the Canadian Health Coalition
has been selected to table ENGO interests and to report back to
the CEN. Brad participated as a member of the last Official Negotating
Team and is also a member of the Biosafety Protocol Advisory Group.
Brad can be reached via bradford@duplisea.ca,
819.770.1626. His
report is available here.
Trade Issues
In addition to the Biosafety Protocol, current
biotech trade issues include the EU's refusal
to approve further crops for human consumption,
a related challenge by the United States to the
World Trade Organization, and Canada's support
of that challenge. More information on the
Canadian Government's position. The EU's
response to that challenge is available. Formal
communication to the WTO by parties can be
reviewed.
Labeling of GE Foods
Many members of the CEN Biotech Working Group
supported MP Charles' Caccia's private members
bill (C-287) regarding genetically modified foods.
The bill was defeated with many MPs deferring
to the Canadian General Standards Board development
of a standard. The CGSB has so far failed to oversee
development of a standard. The process remains
stalled.
Visit
the CGSB.
The Canadian Biotech Advisory Committee recognized
the key importance of the issue for consumers
and encourages the timely development
of a voluntary standard.
Most civil interest groups support a mandatory
labeling system, noting that retailers could voluntarily
label now and choose not to despite consumer polls
that consistently demonstrate a high demand for
labels. Serious concern has been raised for the
representation of civil society on the CGSB Committee.
|
