1.Agri-biotech industry propaganda wrong - GM-free Ireland
2.Resources on animal feed imports and GMO policy - various
3.Basis for European GMO-free claims - Cert ID
4.Fear mongers proven wrong - TraceConsult
5.Move to allow traces of unapproved GMOs - Irish Examiner

NOTE: Non-GM soy in short supply? The figures show the proportion of non-GM soy in Brazil actually increased - NOT decreased - over the last 2 years (pdf) http://bit.ly/wxWVd (see also items 3 & 4)

EXTRACT: [These statistics] put into perspective the "professional" predictions of the commodity industry fear mongers and institutionalized pessimists, primarily those from Europe, who have issued annual warnings since the year 2000 that "within one or two seasons, at the most," the availability of GM-free soybeans would come to an end. What a way to be off target: Ten seasons later this market segment is not only still alive but kicking harder than ever before! (item 4)

A ban on GM crops in Ireland would put us in the same league as Scotland, Wales, Austria, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Luxembourg, Poland, and Switzerland - not an island in a sea of genetic modification! (item 1)
---
---
1.Agri-biotech industry propaganda
COMMENT from GM-free Ireland
http://www.gmfreeireland.org/news/index.php

This [an article in the Irish Examiner, (item 5) Move to allow traces of unapproved GMOs] is the same old agri-biotech industry propaganda that has been disseminated for years by the animal feed cartel and the global commodity traders who control a virtual monopoly on animal feeds imports to Ireland.

The issue is framed as a choice between short supplies of approved GM and abundant supplies of non-approved GM feedstuffs. The message is: if you don't agree to let us contaminate your food chain with unapproved GM feedstuffs (mostly from the USA) against the wishes of the majority of your EU governments and consumers, we will cut off your supplies, starve your livestock, and put your farmers out of business!

No mention of the scientific peer-reviewed evidence of the serious long-term health risks of GMOs to livestock and humans. No mention of the devastating environmental and social impacts of monoculture GM crop production in the countries from which we source our GM feedstuffs. No mention that Ireland can grow traditional non-GM feed crops like barley, oats, and lupins. No mention of the fact that certified GM-free soya and maize feedstuffs are available, affordable, and widely used by our farm and food competitors across Europe. No mention that 53 EU Regions have Qualilty Agriculture strategies which avoid the use of GM feedstuffs. No mention that Austria, Germany and Italy have government-backed GM-free labelling for meat, poultry, eggs, fish, and dairy produce, and that France will follow suit later this year. No mention that the EU market for GM-free labelled animal produce is growing rapidly, with dozens of participating retailers and hundreds of food brands including the EU's biggest retailer Carrefour Group / Auchamp and the EU's biggest dairy co-op, Friesland Campina. No mention that Ireland already has a massive untapped competitive advantage to lead this market, since our cattle and sheep consume less GM feed than livestock in many competing countries, thanks to their grass based diet.

Worst of all, the article fails to mention that a ban on GM crops and a voluntary phase out of GM feed would enable Irish farmers and food producers to leverage our famous green image and our geographical isolation from transboundary wind-borne GM pollen drift to secure a truly unique selling point the most credible safe GM-free food brand in Europe.

The article's author, Irish Examiner farming supplement editor Stephen Cadogan, is well known for his pro-GM industry hype. In his article of 21 June 2007, "GM-free cost up to €40m", he made a statement that must have come straight from Monsanto's PR department:

"Making Ireland an airtight island in a sea of genetic modification would require an army of inspectors poring over every grain of the cereals and cereal preparations we import annually ... Where would the non-GM grain for our livestock come from? Ireland might need to buy up the annual global production each year. This would be financial suicide for our farming industry."

What's wrong with this statement?

*A ban on GM crops in Ireland would put us in the same league as Scotland, Wales, Austria, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Luxembourg, Poland, and Switzerland - not an island in a sea of genetic modification!

*GM-free maize and soya feed is affordable and widely used by competing farmers in other European countries. 99% of EU maize is GM-free and GM-free soy is available from Brazil, India, China and the USA. This year's Non-GM soy production from Brazil alone was 26 million tonnes (45% of its total soy harvest for 2009).

*Moreover, GM-free maize and soya are rigorously certified throughout all stages of production from seed to ship, and are guaranteed GM-free at a contamination threshold below 0.01% at port of delivery. Sourcing GM-free feed would not require "an army of inspectors poring over every grain".

Here we see the application of the "Big Lie" technique of Nazi propaganda, based on the principle that a lie, if audacious enough and repeated enough times, will be believed by the masses.

Shame on the Irish Examiner!
---
---
2.Resources on animal feed imports and GMO policy
http://www.gmfreeireland.org/news/index.php

For accurate information on the EU zero tolerance food safety policy see:

*EU animal feed imports and GMO policy
European Farmers Coordination, Friends of the Earth Europe and Greenpeace, May 2008:
http://www.foeeurope.org/GMOs/animal_feed/Briefing_animal_feed_GMOs_May_2008.pdf

*Zero tolerance - acting to prevent widespread GMO contamination
Friends of the Earth Europe:
http://www.foeeurope.org/GMOs/zero_tolerance.html

*Defra/FSA Ignore Food Security as they try to please the GM lobby
GM Freeze press release, 13 August 2009:
http://www.gmfreeze.org/page.asp?id=398&iType=

*For information on the volumes of certified Non-GMO soya feed from Brazil - see (item 3) below
---
---    
3.A decade of Cert ID's Non-GMO certification success story provides basis for European GMO-free claims
Cert ID press release, 2 September 2009
http://www.cert-id.eu/DisplayNews.php?ActiveNewsID=50

The Brazilian branch of Cert ID, pioneer and global market leader in specialty certifications like Non-GMO and ProTerra certification for social responsibility and environmental sustainability has just published its tenth annual statistics overview of soy product certification volumes under its Non-GMO Standard.

From a combined certification volume of 420,000 metric tons of soybeans in 2000 the annual tonnage has risen to 9.36 (9.0) million tons of soybeans audited and available for certified crushing or shipment to export markets in the 2008-2009 harvest. That amounts to 16.3 (14.9) percent of the total Brazilian soybean crop of 57.3 (60.5) million tons.[1]

All of this tonnage is certified against the Cert ID Non-GMO Standard, which stands for less than the detection limit of 0.1 percent GMO content and fully documented traceability ("Hard IP" in trading talk), allowing animal products such as poultry, dairy, pork etc. to carry the new GMO-free claims available now in some EU Member States ("Gentechnik-frei hergestellt" in Austria and "Ohne Gentechnik" in Germany). Additional European countries are currently preparing comparable legislation.

Legislators and market forces are thus recognizing the clear rejection of GMOs by European consumers in vegetable and animal food products. For more than ten years now, between 65 and 85 percent of consumers in most EU countries would rather purchase GMO-free food.

The availability of Cert ID Certified Non-GMO soy meal in the marketplace makes it possible for poultry, dairy, and meat producers to make GMO-free claims for their products.

Commodity importers as well as producers of animal nutrition face no mandatory labeling problems resulting from EU Regulation (EC) No. 1830/2003 and have an additional selling point to animal producers who want to make a "GMO-free" claim.

Since 2006, practically all of the soy products certified by Cert ID are also covered by the ProTerra Standard for certification of social responsibility and environmental sustainability. ProTerra fully integrates the Basel Criteria for Responsible Soy Production and carries endorsements from Greenpeace and the WWF.

Augusto Freire, CEO of Cert ID do Brasil points out, that "from the 2007 season onwards, practically all of our Brazilian certification clients were able to meet the ProTerra Standard as well and thus could offer both angles to their European clientele: Non-GMO and sustainability." Richard Werran, Managing Director of Cert ID Europe, adds that this combination "is exactly what European retailers want for their supermarket customers." A majority of EU consumers continue to prefer not to purchase GM foods. The first poultry fed on Cert ID certified soy meal and subsequently claimed as "Ohne Gentechnik" found its way to consumer dinner tables several months ago.

The report is available at http://is.gd/3DSZ8
[The figures show proportion of non-GM soy in Brazil increased from 40% 2 years ago to 45% now]

Further information from:

Augusto Freire
Managing Director
Cert ID do Brasil
Tel. +55 51 9117 8541
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Richard Werran
Managing Director
Cert ID Europe
Tel. +44 1827 874 849
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Sandy Kepler
CEO
FoodChain Global Advisors
Tel. +1 641 469 6181
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
---
---
4.COMMENT on Cert ID: A decade of Non-GMO commodity certification leads to "GMO-free" claims
TraceConsult, 25 September 2009
http://bit.ly/22Ydal

Comment by TraceConsult: At least one important source has now contributed an element of clarity to the confused debate about the zero tolerance issue in regards to commodity imports to the European Union containing even traces of unapproved GMOs and about fears that the GMO-free soy production will soon come to an end.

Specialty certifier Cert ID has continued the company tradition of publishing its annual volume statistics of Non-GMO certification. By focusing on this particular type of certification that is so much in need for the benefit of European commodity buyers - and by adding sustainability certification ProTerra in 2006 - this comparatively small certification body became the global leader in its field soon after it had launched this program in 1999.

This 2009 certification volumes overview, now also containing references to India and China, is downloadable from the company’s websites and soon also from TraceConsult's. For years, the value of this annual document has been immense, inasmuch it has put into perspective the “professional” predictions of the commodity industry fear mongers and institutionalized pessimists, primarily those from Europe, who have issued annual warnings since the year 2000 that "within one or two seasons, at the most," the availability of GM-free soybeans would come to an end.

What a way to be off target: Ten seasons later this market segment is not only still alive but kicking harder than ever before!

After 14.9 percent of last year’s total Brazilian soy crop was available certified by Cert ID as Non-GMO, in the 2009 crop, the percentage has risen to 16.3 percent. That is more than one sixth of the soy production of the world’s second largest soy producer! Since 2008, the document also uses figures provided by ABRANGE, the Brazilian industry association of Non-GM processors. In fact, at least in Brazil, the core clientele is recruited among ABRANGE members.

A little known but fascinating aspect is that practically the entire volume is also certified against the company’s ProTerra Standard. ProTerra fully integrates the elements of the Basel Criteria for Responsible Soy Production, including Non-GMO, a fact that has caused TraceConsult to raise the question more than once why platforms of lesser sustainability expression, such as the RTRS, are promoted and endorsed by the same organizations that helped launch the Basel Criteria. Both Greenpeace and the WWF have endorsed the ProTerra Standard.

All in all, the Cert ID release offers assurance and comfort to all those European producers and manufacturers working on consumer products carrying “GMO-free” claims. It also offers an opportunity to rejoice for all those who have enabled and supported the creation of this market segment.
---
---
5.Move to allow traces of unapproved GMOs
Stephen Cadogan
Irish Examiner, 24 September 2009
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/kfaukfgbmhkf/rss2/

CHEAPER animal feed, particularly for pig and poultry farmers, will be one of Agriculture Commissioner Mariann Fischer Boel's objectives before she steps down later this year.

That will be one of the aims of a proposal she is expected to make, to reduce the maximum level for genetically modified (GM) residues in imported animal feed ingredients.

Feeds have been dearer in the EU because an estimated 200,000 tonnes of US soybeans have been blocked at EU ports this year. They contained trace amounts of two GM maizes not yet been approved by member states ó although they have been declared safe by EFSA, the European Food Safety Authority.

Livestock feed shortages are imminent, due to member states' attitudes to GM crops, according to the European Commission. Mrs Boel recently told agriculture ministers that "breaking the log-jam of GM crop approvals" would throw a lifeline to dairy, beef and pig farmers who face high feed prices.

Her stance was supported by Belgium, Britain, Denmark, Portugal, Romania, Spain, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic, officials said. Austria, a GM opponent which usually blocks approvals, and Poland, expressed scepticism. Ministers from France and Germany did not speak in the debate. (Ireland usually abstains in votes on approving new genetically modified crops.)

The EU imports nearly two-thirds of the 33.5 million tonnes of the soybean meal used each year by its food and livestock industry.

A commission official said continued resistance to genetically modified organisms (GMOs) could see European farmers lose market share to imported meat from GM-fed livestock.

"The worst case scenario is that eventually it becomes so expensive to import protein that our own guys go out of business and we end up importing meat from countries fed on the same GMOs not approved for use here."

"If we don't solve the problem of zero tolerance shortly, then we will have to stop the imports altogether," said Klaus-Dieter Schumacher, president of COCERAL, the group that represents Europe's cereal and foodstuff makers.

Ms Boel said: "The fundamental question here is not about liking or disliking GMOs, it's about maintaining a competitive large-scale meat production in the EU, or preferring to import our meat from third countries that do not have the same reluctance about GMOs."

She has been backed by Commission President Barroso who said it should be possible to combine EU authorisation based on science with freedom for member states to decide if they wish to grow GM crops.

At the moment, if a GM variety is unapproved, no trade of it is allowed enter the EU.

The rejected shipments of soybeans had minute amounts of non-approved maize, presumably from a previous load that the ship carried.

Ms Boel is expected to overcome this feed trade problem by proposing a higher threshold for adventitious contamination, raising it from the current zero level to a minute level of perhaps 0.1%.