Nestlé Urges Europe to Soften Line on GM

The world's biggest food company has called on European policymakers to reconsider their opposition to genetically modified crops, as soaring commodity prices put basic foodstuffs such as wheat and rice out of reach of the world's poorest.

"You cannot today feed the world without genetically modified organisms," Peter Brabeck, chairman of Nestlé, told the Financial Times. "We have the means to make agriculture sustainable in the long term. What we don't see for the time being is the political will."

Mr Brabeck said Europe's opposition to such biotechnology had encouraged African policymakers to reject GM crops. South Africa is the only country on the African continent to commercialise them, growing GM maize, cotton and soyabeans.

"The European Union used political pressure in Africa to prevent some of those countries using genetically modified organisms," said Mr Brabeck.

"I don't think that was necessarily helpful for the agriculture of those countries nor for their supplies."

Peter Mandelson, the EU trade commissioner, rejected any allegation of bullying. "Africa is free to grow whatever crops it wishes, but as the vast majority of its agricultural exports are destined for the EU, it is clearly in its interests to try to meet the needs of that market."

Many countries in Africa and Asia have shied away from planting GM crops for fear of being shut out of the EU - the biggest importer of foodstuffs from developing countries.

The European Commission says biotechnology could help to solve the food crisis and officials admit to frustration with national governments, which often block Commission recommendations for GM approval. "But their resistance stems from how Europe feels about GMOs," said a spokesman. "Even if we approve them, it doesn't mean anybody would eat them."

Only 21 per cent of Europeans will eat genetically engineered food, according to a Commission survey.

Few GM strains of crops have been licensed by the EU, which has yet to rule on a new generation of such crops. This has left European farmers angry about the increasingly high prices they are being forced to pay for non-GM animal feed.

In Britain, the National Farmers' Union has asked leading supermarket chains to drop GM-free requirements for all their foods except organic ranges. Farmers are finding it difficult to source non-GM soyabeans to feed poultry flocks because Brazil, the leading exporter of non-GM soya, has been planting more GM crops.

Mr Brabeck said European concerns over the the health risks of GM were unfounded, given that such foods had been eaten safely by Americans for decades.

"It is one of the safest technologies that we have ever seen - much safer than bio or organic or whatever else is fashionable in Europe," he said.

Organic food crops, which typically yield less than GM food crops, were "a nice treat for those who can afford it", he said.

Opponents of GM foods have argued that there is little proof that the crops have higher yields. But proponents maintain that there is scientific evidence.

US Department of Agriculture research found that one variety of GM corn yielded 9 per cent more than conventional corn. The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, which encourages developing countries to adopt GM technology, says GM cotton has increased yields by 50 per cent in India.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/271ec376-40bb-11dd-bd48-0000779fd2ac.html

Raphael Minder
Financial Times
June23.2008

World War II -- Brought to You by Nestlé's Candy

http://aconstantineblacklist.blogspot.com/2008/07/world-war-ii-brought-to-you-by-nestls.html

Comments

[James]

Yes, Europe is, by default, preventing African countries from growing genetically modified crops. We have Europe threatening Africa's agricultural imports if they've strains of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). There's a lot of hypocrisy here. Europe, itself, accepts cattle feed from the U.S. and other European countries, but it wouldn't do the same for products from Africa.

On my blog, GMO Africa, I've always argued that there is no single solution to the current food crisis. Every option must be put on the table. I've no problem with organic food being used to tackle the current food crisis. Biotech corporations such as Monsanto, DuPont, Bayer and BASF are playing a vital role in enhancing food security in the world. The same applies to companies engaged in organic farming.

[ce399]

The best solution to the "current food crisis" is to end capitalism.

[michelle denise]

I'd like to counter some of the pro -GM arguments by my internet research in the last six month.

I've discovered that yes; initially GMO farmers do use fewer varieties of insecticide/herbicides. However I have also discovered that super weeds then become resistant and the chemicals needed to combat new weeds and super bugs need to increase again. Soil degradation, environmental destruction, seed/chemical costs are a few of the problems along with massive health risks.

I agree that the world does have a food 'distribution' problem which should be addressed with new technologies and methods. However, drought, cold resistant, high yield, non GM crops have already been tested and found successful in many countries (including Australia). All governments should be backing those technologies that are safer for the earth and the individual. Indian and Australian studies have shown 65% increase in yields in some crops when timing of seeding and soil nutriment balances are considered.

The World Health Organization has just declared GM a 'contaminant' in foodstuffs. There are law suits now in train in several countries on a variety of issues surrounding GM. Our own non-GM farmers will have to sue their Australian GM neighbours for contamination and loss of market. Chinese, Japanese European and Middle East businesses want GM-free produce. A growing number of food retailers and restaurants in Australia are doing the same, along with 95% of the informed population polled on the subject.

Gene Ethics director Bob Phelps said WA's GM-free status had been earning growers a premium of $40 to $85 above world market prices for most of this year; will grow as people realise that they value their health more than a little price rise in essential foods. Food prices will rise anyway as pesticide use and seed prices will force farmers to pass on costs. Has anyone thought about the fact that GM may be accepted in countries where they no longer have any choice of non-GM product because GM has already been introduced surreptitiously? Farmers in all countries need to get back their land/livelyhood of which they’ve been robbed, by the giant multinationals.

I suggest everyone concerned look a little more closely at the growing number of adverse reports available to him on GM (ie health and ethics issues). Concerned consumers could also view the DVD documentaries “The World According to Monsanto” and “Unjust Genes” for further information.

Geoff Bebb and Michelle Denise
Network of Concerned Consumers
Perth
Western Australia