Presenting the Real Picture
USAID refuses to take it lying down. After the repeated denial of permission to sell cattle feed in the name of food aid to India, it continues to manipulate the political decision making process to ensure that all impediments in the dumping of harmful food products are removed. The 10,000 tonnes of corn-soya blend that it is trying desperately to push as food relief through CARE India and CRS contains Starlink GM corn, which is only approved for cattle consumption in the United States.
USAID first used its political clout to get the first chairman of the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), Mr A.M. Gokhale transferred. Mr Gokhale had taken a tough decision to stop the import unless the relief agencies (read the USAID) provide a certificate stating that the imports did not contain Starlink. He was replaced by Ms Sushma Choudhury, who too understood the danger of allowing the import even if it came in the name of food aid, and has therefore been transferred within a few months of taking over as chairperson of the GEAC. Well, didn't we know that USAID (some call it the 'US Artificial Insemination Department') only works as the political arm of the multinational corporations. No wonder, the USAID also has massive support programmes for governance and democracy !!
AgBioIndia learns that the same corn-soya blend is now being forced on Sri Lanka. And it is not through CARE and CRS, but through the more respectable World Food Programme of the United Nations !!
Meanwhile, the hunger strikers in Philippines have broken the strike. We salute their courage and hope the world would soon realise the danger of blindly accepting GM foods and crops.
Contents:
1. Notice Board: GEAC Chairperson Changed -- The Hindu
2. Hunger strike against GM food ends --Gulf News
3. Inside story: How MIT deal fell apart -- Indian Express
4.Copyright decision draws farmers' ire -- The Nation
NOTICE BOARD
New Delhi, May 23: The special secretary in the Ministry of Environment & Forests, V.K.Duggal, has been made chairperson of the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), a government regulatory body that clears decisions on the import and release of genetically engineered organisms in India. The committee was earlier headed by an additional secretary, Ms Sushma Choudhury.
While officially it is being said that it was a routine re-allotment of work at the senior bureaucratic level, Ministry sources said that Ms Choudhury 'rigid' stand on the import of corn soya blend into India was not being appreciated. The controversial issue involves the import of a 10,000 tonne corn-soya blend shipment by CARE India and the Catholic Relief Services as food aid. The shipment was rejected as it is supposed to be contaminated with Starlink corn, which has not been approved for human consumption as it is known to cause allergies. It has only been approved as cattle feed and all foods contaminated with Starlink had to be withdrawn from the US supermarkets in 2002.
Three hunger strikers decided to end their fast today, but expressed happiness that 100 other hunger strikers joined them overnight, to protest the proliferation of genetically modified corn in the country.
"I lost 18 pounds," said Roberto Verzola, one of the three remaining hunger strikers who held rallies in front of the agriculture department's office in suburban Quezon City since April 22.
"We have done everything that is humanly possible to stop the poisoned seeds of genetically modified corn from being planted in our farms," stated Verzola.
He blamed President Gloria Arroyo and Luis Lorenzo, the agriculture secretary, for not ordering a moratorium on the planting of the genetically modified corn in Philippine farms.
Last December, Arroyo gave her approval to the proposal of Mosanto Corporation of the United States to sell seeds of a genetically modified corn with bacillus thuringienses which is meant to destroy corn borers.
"The Arroyo government has failed us," said Verzola, adding that Arroyo and Lorenzo did not put a moratorium on Mosanto's plan before leaving for the U.S.
"By this time, the seeds are being distributed to farmers. It will be difficult to control the distribution of the seeds. Once they are planted, in three months, the plants will bloom, and there will be cross-pollination with the local corn variety which will contaminate our fields with the toxic corn," explained Verzola.
When that happens, the only way to control the spread of the toxic corn is by uprooting the plants. By that time, the government will have to promise to compensate the farmers their losses.
"That kind of situation is untenable," noted Verzola.
At the same time, Mosanto has started to sell corn seeds at P4,500 ($86.54) for an 11-kilo bag, which can cover a hectare of farmland. The agriculture department has a contract with Mosanto to buy the genetically modified corn seeds, for free distribution to farmers.
"This is what we call the unholy alliance between the government and Monsanto," said Verzola.
This, he added, will result in the cross pollination of the local corn variety, the contamination of corn fields, and the eventual weakening of the antibodies of the Filipino consumers, which will make them too weak to fight infectious diseases. "We will hold President Arroyo and Secretary Lorenzo liable for this kind of irresponsibility," said Verzola.
Meanwhile, other environment groups joined the "indignation" rally in front of the agriculture department late in the afternoon. Hunger strikers from other parts of the Philippines went to Manila for the event.
"I've come to Manila in support of my fellow hunger strikers," said Andrew Haralam, a Peace Corps volunteer and an American national, who led a hunger strike in Baguio, northern Luzon. He was forced to resign after he launched his own sympathy strike on May 9.
"The evidence against Bt (bacillus thuringiensis) corn is compelling," said Haralam.
Another hunger striker from Baguio, Manny Onalan, also arrived in Manila for the indignation rally. "I stopped eating in protest of Bt corn on May 7," he said. The last day of the hunger strike was directed at President Arroyo and Mosanto, said other hunger strikers.
Several other environmental groups in the Philippines and abroad vowed to join the hunger strike in spirit, said Verzola.
Meanwhile, the lobby will be in Congress where a bill was recently filed to stop the spread of genetically modified food products in the country.
Inside story: How MIT deal fell apart
http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=23688
New Delhi, May 10: The story of India's most high-profile tech deal - with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) - is, in fact, more bizarre than the way it ended.
The trouble perhaps began with the price tag. MIT wanted India to shell out $5 million (around Rs 25 crore) just to use the name Media Lab Asia for 10 years. If the country chipped in with another $1 million a year, it could call the project MIT Media Lab.
That was not all. Another $ 3 million was sought as an annual 'programme fee ' at the end of the first year of operations - which was exploratory - that saw little progress and no private investment.
It wasn't as if MIT wasn't willing to negotiate. In a letter, MIT offered to settle for a payment of $1 million per year if $5 million seemed too high, but this would mean that the 'exclusivity' of the contract could be called off any moment.
When legal opinion was sought, it turned out that the word 'scope' would determine whether the tie-up was exclusive or not. According to the opinion given by solicitors Amarchand Mangaldas to the government, if the 'scope' of the tie-up with any other country was changed, a Media Lab (China) could come up. Also, MIT was reportedly in talks with Singapore and Korea despite commitment to India for exclusivity of the Media Lab for Asia. Another problem was the area of research.
According to documents available with The Sunday Express, several programmes earlier listed for research work had nothing to do to benefit the rural Indian masses. These were dropped within the first few months. These included 'Interactive Tabla Teacher', 'Cultural Computing Centre', 'Digital Walkthrough', 'Artcastings', 'Infotrans', 'Virtual Collaborative Workplaces' and 'Heat Pump-assisted Chiller Cum Dryer.'
At the end of the first year, the IITs - which incidentally have a budget of Rs 1 crore each - felt they had got no substantial inputs from MIT and hence wanted a more diverse cooperation with other foreign universities.
IIT Bombay's Ashok Misra wrote to the government, saying ''no specific interactions with any researcher or faculty from Media Labs of MIT '' were held ''nor had inputs from them added significant value to the projects.''
He stated that while the government was paying for the research work carried out mainly by the IITs, ''intellectual property is to be shared with Media Lab, MIT.''
''We gained nothing from the tie-up which was expected to help carry out research in a non-governmental atmosphere and bring in private investment,'' says Communications and IT Minister Arun Shourie. ''But nothing of the sort happened and, in fact, IIT professors were in any case doing all the work.''
The project was originally set up to develop commercially viable information and communication technologies which would enable rural prosperity. The five Indian IITs with help from MIT were supposed to come up with cost-effective and commercially viable technologies. The original cost was estimated to be Rs 65 crore for the year, of which Rs 35 crore was spent.
The Cabinet will now decide on a new leaner Media Lab minus MIT. The IITs will have a larger role to play. The funds required for the project have also been scaled down from Rs 1,535 crore for five years (Rs 455 crore as contributions from the government and the remaining from private sources) to Rs 227 crore from government funds and Rs 45 crore from private investments.
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/page.arcview.php3?clid=5&id=78833&date=2003-05-17&usrsess=1
Farmers' rights advocates yesterday blasted a decision by a government committee to provide intellectual property rights to seeds used in local crops, saying it favoured the interests of multinational seed companies.
An open letter to Deputy Agriculture Minister Newin Chidchob demanded that the plant protection committee decision be revoked.
The committee, chaired by Agriculture Ministry deputy permanent secretary Sima Morakul, recently agreed that the seeds for 12 commonly grown crops - including tomato, chilli, cucumber, cowpea, soybean, corn and morning glory - be granted intellectual property rights as proposed by the Seed Association of Thailand.
"All 12 seeds are bred by multinational companies such as Monsanto and Pioneer. I don't understand why the government committee wants to protect their interests rather than the rights of our farmers," said Daecha Siribhat, director of the Kwan Khao Foundation, a non-government organisation (NGO). that works to protect local rice varieties and farmers' rights.
Small-scale farmers said they would hold a large rally in Chiang Mai on Friday if deputy minister Newin ignored them, said Decha.
Intellectual property rights for seeds are provided for by Article 33 of the 2000 Plant Variety Protection Act.
Daecha's protest yesterday was also joined by Witoon Lienchamroon, director of Biothai, another NGO that works for the rights of small-scale farmers. Witoon said that if the 12 plant varieties were protected by property rights, the companies with the rights would be able to deny Thai farmers the right to cultivate their own seeds for future crops. Witoon is also a member of the plant protection committee, but said that the controversial decision was made while he was not present.
"Instead of trying to protect seed strains developed by multinational companies, the committee should try its best to protect local and native plant varieties so that the intellectual property rights belong to the Thai public," said Witoon.
However, another committee member who declined to be named said that the decision did not apply exclusively to multinational companies.
"Intellectual property rights are not reserved for only multinational companies; local farmers are eligible also. If they develop a new plant variety they can apply with the committee to provide protection for their rights to it," said the committee member.
To post, send mail to <editor@agbioindia.org>. To unsubscribe, send mail to <agbioindia-unsubscribe@groups.onlinepolicy.net>. (This may fail if your address has changed since you signed up; if so, or for other assistance, contact <agbioindia-owner@groups.onlinepolicy.net>.) For web-based access to the newsletter and for archived postings, go to http://www.agbioindia.org
|
If
you have come to this page from an outside location click
here to get back to mindfully.org |