[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

mindless propaganda

The Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee ( an appointed group made
up for the most part by biotechnology company members or academic
advocates of biotechnology) just released a long report. the report is
available at ; http://www.cbac-cccb.ca/ The report shows how far the
government and academe have escaped from reality even though they tried
to be highly selective during two years of "public" consultation. After
the conclusion of two years of "consultation" the committee seems to
have decided that the public does not really matter and their concerns
do not count. The recommendation on food labeling shows that the
committee believes the public was wrong about mandatory labeling ,what
they should have the committee commands is a "voluntary" labeling for GM
free foods. The Canadian Council of Grocery Distributors will set the
requirements for "voluntary" labeling. The committee believed that
mandatory labeling would contravene  international trade agreements
"mandatory labeling scheme would contravene trade agreements".
Strangely, most countries in the world seem to require mandatory
labeling, only USA objects to mandatory labeling. The committee report
and recommendations seem to be mindless propaganda.
Improving the Regulation of
Genetically Modified Foods
and Other Novel Foods in Canada
Report to the Government of Canada
Biotechnology Ministerial Coordinating Committee
Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee
August 2002

Recommendation 7. Labelling
We note that the mandatory labelling of GM foods is already required for
health and safety reasons.
CBAC recommends that the federal government adopt a voluntary system for
labelling GM foods for
matters other than health and safety. The majority of CBAC members
believe that Canada should begin
with a voluntary labelling system for GM foods to allow time for testing
the system's adequacy and
efficiency and to develop an accepted international standard; to provide
consumers who wish to
purchase GM-free products with the ability to identify them; to lim it
costs; and to avoid trade action
where a mandatory labelling scheme would contravene trade agreements.
The dissenting member,
Anne Mitchell, is strongly in favour of proceeding directly to mandatory
labelling, and notes that a
majority of respondents to our Interim Report urged a mandatory system.
We emphasize that before any labelling system, whether voluntary or
mandatory, can be introduced, an
effective, agreed-upon standard is essential. The Canadian Council of
Grocery Distributors and the
Canadian General Standards Board are currently developing such a
standard following extensive
consultations. We recommend that once a Canadian standard has been
developed and agreed upon, it
be implemented via a voluntary system and that the system be widely
communicated to the public. We
recommend that it be evaluated in five years to determine whether it
gives consumers sufficient choice
concerning the foods they purchase and, if not, that alternatives,
including mandatory labelling, be
considered. Concurrently, the government should enhance its cooperative
efforts with other countries to
develop a harmonized approach to labelling, with special emphasis on the
development of an
internationally accepted standard.