MISPLACED CONFIDENCE OF THE DAY: Sir Gustav said he was confident that industry could keep GM products segregated from the farm gate to the supermarket. [That'll be a first, then, especially with canola! - ed.]

---

Furore as ban on crops lifted
David Rood
The Age, November 28 2007
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/furore-as-ban-on-gm-crops-lifted/2007/11/27/1196036892756.html

A DECISION to allow genetically modified canola to be grown in Victoria has inflamed dissent in the Brumby Government and sparked warnings that non-GM farms could be contaminated.

Anti-GM activists have also lashed the decision, saying consumers face a growing array of food made from GM material - without always knowing when they are buying it.

But the move was welcomed by rural interests as sensible, and backed by scientists who say the risks of adverse consequences are minimal.

Farmers in Victoria and NSW will be free to plant genetically modified canola from early next year after both states yesterday announced the lifting of bans on the controversial crops - despite appeals not to do so from Western Australia and Tasmania.

The Brumby Government accepted a recommendation from a scientific panel headed by Victoria's chief scientist, Sir Gustav Nossal.

Announcing the decision, Premier John Brumby said it would boost the economy and help the environment.

Cabinet approved the lifting of the ban on Monday, despite stinging criticism of the Premier from some of his own MPs.

Copies of Sir Gustav's review were released by the Premier only after it was announced that the ban would be removed.

Labor MP Tammy Lobato said she was disappointed that MPs had been left out of the process. She said an independent panel should have investigated the issues and its report released for public discussion.

Another MP, who declined to be named, said Mr Brumby was 'treating caucus like idiots'.

But another MP came to Mr Brumby's defence, saying he had been open on the issue and given all sides a good hearing.

The Age revealed on Saturday that Mr Brumby faced a revolt over the issue, with one MP branding him arrogant and criticising his 'crash-through' style. 'He just won't listen,' the MP told The Age. 'He's good at numbers but he can't read people.'

Five Labor MPs wrote to Sir Gustav's panel expressing fears about GM crops and calling for the moratorium to be kept.

Yesterday Mr Brumby was unapologetic, saying it was the 'nature of politics' that people with strong views would be critical of views they didn't like.

'I have listened to the views of caucus and in my own heart I have done everything right in terms of listening,' he said.

Mr Brumby said removing the ban would deliver greater choice to farmers and consumers and generate $115 million in economic activity in Victoria over eight years.

He said GM canola would also benefit the environment by requiring less pesticide on crops, and argued that GM technology could bring other benefits such as salt-resistant and drought-resistant grains and allergy-resistant grass.

Sir Gustav said he was confident that industry could keep GM products segregated from the farm gate to the supermarket. Keeping the moratorium, on the other hand, would have had a negative impact on scientific research and development.

He said he was 'sure as I can be of any other thing that the health and environment aspects of GM canola have been thoroughly examined'. But he conceded that in some people's eyes, there would be damage to Victoria's clean, green image.

Bob Phelps of Gene Ethics said there was no labelling of GM canola foods so the food on shelves would leave shoppers without a choice.

Canola products, such as margarine and oil, are heavily refined and are therefore not covered by labelling requirements on GM products.

The organic food sector criticised the Government for not introducing buffer zones around GM crops.

The Victorian Farmers Federation, backing the decision, said farmers had to compete against 10 million farmers in 22 countries using GM products. 'It is unfair to the Australian farmer not to have the choice to use that technology,' the federation's Simon Ramsay said.

The Nationals said the decision was a victory for common sense. 'GM crops will require less pest and weed control, use less water and potentially reclaim salt-affected land,' leader Peter Ryan said.

But Greens upper house MP Greg Barber said GM canola could contaminate nearby crops and genetic traits, such as herbicide resistance, could cross into weed species.

He said GM canola would also benefit the environment by requiring less pesticide on crops, and argued that GM technology could bring other benefits such as salt-resistant and drought-resistant grains and allergy-resistant grass.

Sir Gustav said he was confident that industry could keep GM products segregated from the farm gate to the supermarket. Keeping the moratorium, on the other hand, would have had a negative impact on scientific research and development.

He said he was 'sure as I can be of any other thing that the health and environment aspects of GM canola have been thoroughly examined'. But he conceded that in some people's eyes, there would be damage to Victoria's clean, green image.

Bob Phelps of Gene Ethics said there was no labelling of GM canola foods so the food on shelves would leave shoppers without a choice.

Canola products, such as margarine and oil, are heavily refined and are therefore not covered by labelling requirements on GM products.

The organic food sector criticised the Government for not introducing buffer zones around GM crops.

The Victorian Farmers Federation, backing the decision, said farmers had to compete against 10 million farmers in 22 countries using GM products. 'It is unfair to the Australian farmer not to have the choice to use that technology,' the federation's Simon Ramsay said.

The Nationals said the decision was a victory for common sense. 'GM crops will require less pest and weed control, use less water and potentially reclaim salt-affected land,' leader Peter Ryan said.

But Greens upper house MP Greg Barber said GM canola could contaminate nearby crops and genetic traits, such as herbicide resistance, could cross into weed species.

With ORIETTA GUERRERA, AAP