COMMENT by TraceConsult: The reporting by several British broadsheets over the past few days and now also by the FoodNavigator.com reminds long-term observers of the GMO issue of a series of Cassandra calls heard every now and then over the past decade. However, the repetition of fallacies doesn't make their message any more true.

Major problems in the area of sufficient future supply of GM-free raw materials for the food and feed industries have been predicted with almost annual regularity since 1998. Eleven years later, the supply of certified GMO-free material is stronger than ever before. Contrary to what is reported in the media these days (and repeated by FoodNavigator above), the recently concluded harvest campaign in Brazil has, for the first time since GM soybeans were planted in that country, shown a practical halt to the trend of increasing GM volumes.

The 2007/2008 harvest yielded 45% non-GM beans and the percentage for this year, 2008/2009, has remained the same. According to figures by ABRANGE, the GM portion of the crop has remained at 55% (and not at 65%, as reported below) for the second season. We can already hear now the protests from insiders challenging these figures. They require a short explanation:

In order to make commercial sense and because of European legal requirements, GM-free material must be conducted through a logistical chain of IP systems. Identity preservation, however, has a price tag because of the extra measures needed. No soy farmer, cooperative or soybean crusher, however, is inclined to pay for these extras unless there is a chance to recover the expenses. If the supplier knows he has nobody to pay him a premium, of course, he will not venture into costly IP systems. On the contrary, where there is demand, IP systems will be set up. Just over 20 percent of the 2009 soybean crop in Brazil ended up in IP systems. And of the total harvest of around 57 million tons, over 15 percent are now actually available certified with fully documented traceability at max. 0.1 percent GMO content. In trading industry terminology: "Hard IP Non-GMO".

Besides Brazil, India also has several million tons of material ready to be certified and to ship to European importers.

These figures prove that enough non-GM soy meal is available and the volumes ordered can be increased significantly.

Not only will this material not fall under the labeling requirement of EU Regulation (EC) No.1829/2003, it is also suitable to be used in positive claims schemes (GMO-free, Gentechnikfrei hergestellt, Ohne Gentechnik, Nourri sans OGM) set up by more and more supply chains in various European countries.

Her Majesty's Government probably knows best why it prefers GMOs in the production of food its citizens should purchase at the local grocer's. More and more, consumers frequenting supermarkets elsewhere are given the option to make an educated choice. As to the position of British retailers themselves, nothing has changed at all. Tesco CEO Sir Terry Leahy is always looking at ways to improve the bottom line by reducing costs. But as a prominent NGO representative usually well-connected to the retail industry pointed out to The Independent, it would take a very brave chain to leave the ten-year old industry policy of assuring to consumers a Non-GMO status for its private label products.
---
---
GM policy could bring price, supply issues, warns UK
Guy Montague-Jones
FoodNavigator, 2 September 2009
http://www.foodnavigator.com/Legislation/GM-policy-could-bring-price-supply-issues-warns-UK

The UK government has warned that the EU's hard line on GM food could disrupt the supply chain and result in price hikes.

Farmers in North and South America are switching to GM, making it harder and harder for food importers in the UK to maintain non-GM sources of supply, according to a report from the Food Standards Agency (FSA) and the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).

Although a small number of GM foods are allowed in the EU, the relatively hardline approach means many of the GM produced ingredients and crops from the US and South America are unsuitable for import into the bloc. This is causing problems food manufacturers and retailers in Europe that are only set to become more serious as GM spreads outside the EU.

Price and supply worries

Food manufacturers told the government that the cost of sourcing non-GM food ingredients is increasing so that non-GM ingredients now cost 10 to 20 per cent more than their GM equivalents.

Increased prices are not the only worry as the task of even securing non-GM sources of supply could become unfeasible.

The government report said: "Retailers were concerned that they may not be able to maintain their current non-GM sources of supply as producers increasingly adopt GM technology around the world."

Worryingly the report also said that food served with GM food ingredients may be reaching customers without legally required warnings.

It said that oil from GM crops is used, particularly in the catering sector, and that "it was considered unlikely that relevant information regarding food produced using such oils is provided to the final consumer, as required in EC legislation."

One area where there is immediate concern regarding the current policy is soya. The report said the UK feed and food sectors are worried that it will become impossible to maintain the current non-GM soya supply chain.

Brazil and Argentina supply 90 per cent of UK soya imports and GM cultivation is on the rise to the extent that Argentina's production is now 94 per cent GM while Brazil's is at least 65 per cent. The availability of non-GM soya is therefore likely to be a major issue for the food industry in the next 1-2 years, said the report.

Proposed solutions

In light of the potential food supply and price problems posed by GM, DEFRA and the FSA called for a more streamlined EU decision making process for GM products. The bodies also argued for a reconsideration of the current zero tolerance approach regarding the presence of low levels of non-EU approved GMOs. The report said decision makers must take account of what is proportionate in safety terms and what might be pragmatic from a trade perspective.

Finally, the report said the timetable for adoption of new GM feed crops should be monitored in the main supplier countries in relation to the timing of approval for EU import. The report warned that remedial action may need to be taken to prevent supply problems and risks must therefore be gauged accurately.