[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[SANET-MG] GMO liability
From GM watch
EXCERPTS: Seed manufacturers who will reportedly not sell their
products in
Vermont if the bill passes may have been responsible for the nearly
unanimous
vote, senators said.
"Some of the manufacturers made threats that undermined their arguments,"
Welch said.
Sen. John Campbell, D-Windsor, was even more direct.
"I don't take well to threats from international companies that don't want
to come into the state and compete on a level playing field," he said.
"It's
not acceptable."
------
Senate passes GMO liability bill
By Louis Porter
Vermont Press Bureau
http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050406/NEWS/504060325/1
003
MONTPELIER — The Vermont Senate on Tuesday gave nearly unanimous
approval to
a bill designed to make seed manufacturers liable for the impacts of
genetically modified crops.
As many as a dozen senators were expected to oppose the bill, but the
final
vote was 26-1. Sen. Wendy Wilton, R-Rutland, voted against final passage.
But the political wrangling over the bill, which now goes to the House, is
far from over and could end in a veto by Gov. James Douglas.
And a portion of the bill which defines the extent to which
manufacturers of
genetically modified seeds are liable for potential harm remains a
sticking
point.
Two amendments designed to strengthen the protection afforded to farmers
were added to the bill almost without debate.
But the amendment which caused the most consternation and discussion in
the
Statehouse wasn't even offered on the floor in the end.
That change, which hung on a single word, would have removed the "strict
liability" provision of the proposed legislation.
Under strict liability a seed manufacturer would not have to be proven at
fault before they could be held liable for potential damages from
pollen drift
of genetically modified crops.
The change supported by Wilton, Sen. Robert Starr, D-Essex/Orleans, and
Sen.
Harold Giard, D-Addison, who also proposed the other two amendments, would
have changed the wording of the bill from "is liable" to "may be
liable"."The
dog in this bill is strict liability," said Starr, who vowed to work to
change the language in the bill in the House, where he used to be a
state represent
ative. Strict liability is "killing a fly with a baseball bat," he said.
Wilton agreed.
"I thought long and hard about what I was going to do," she said. "It's
the
strict liability provision that is most damaging."
If strict liability remains in the bill, Agriculture Secretary Steve Kerr
said he will recommend to Douglas that he veto the bill.
"The governor shares the concerns that have been articulated by Secretary
Kerr," said Douglas spokesman Jason Gibbs. "The governor is hopeful we
will be
able to reach a compromise before the bill arrives on his desk."
Strict liability is typically used with chemicals and products which are
known to be abnormally dangerous, Kerr said, and that claim has not
even been
discussed this year during the debate over the genetically modified
seed bill.
Pesticides, which are known to be dangerous, are not governed under strict
liability, he said.
Amy Shollenberger, policy director for Rural Vermont, said strict
liability
was the only way to ensure that seed manufactures, not farmers, were
liable
for the impact of genetically modified crops.
"It's the only way to get it off their backs and establish a clear
course of
action," she said.
"The fundamental part of the strict liability is to have the
responsibility
lie where it belongs," said Senate President Pro Tem Peter Welch,
D-Windsor.
Seed manufacturers who will reportedly not sell their products in
Vermont if
the bill passes may have been responsible for the nearly unanimous vote,
senators said.
"Some of the manufacturers made threats that undermined their arguments,"
Welch said.
Sen. John Campbell, D-Windsor, was even more direct.
"I don't take well to threats from international companies that don't want
to come into the state and compete on a level playing field," he said.
"It's
not acceptable."
********************************************************
To unsubscribe from SANET-MG:
1- Visit http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html to unsubscribe or;
2- Send a message to <listserv@sare.org> from the address subscribed to the list. Type "unsubscribe sanet-mg" in the body of the message.
Visit the SANET-MG archives at: http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html
For more information on grants and other resources available through the SARE program, please visit http://www.sare.org.