1.Bt cotton losses in South
2.MNCs, designers join lobbies against GM crops
3.Draft biotech policy draws criticism from NGOs
4.Greens ask India to keep out genetics from Europe export
The campaign for making India a GMO-free zone will begin in two months, according to Indian environmentalists. Indian activists have already asked American Sports goods giant Nike, international lifestyle brand Espirit and several domestic fashion designers the big question--If we launch a campaign, will you refuse to procure GM products for manufacturing your products? "The answer was Yes." (item 2)
"Apart from civil society organisations in the country, the performance of Bt cotton in 2004 has come under severe criticisms from some scientists" (item 1)
"If you want to keep your exports to Europe up, keep out genetically modified organisms." (item 4)
"This policy has included practically all the suggestions of the industry and has ignored many areas of public concern." - Dr Suman Sahai, the sole representative of civil society on the panel drawing up India's draft National Biotechnology Development Strategy (item 3)
------
1.Bt cotton losses in South
Financial Express, April 04 2005
http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=86987
NEW DELHI, APRIL 3:
Apart from civil society organisations in the country, the performance of Bt cotton in 2004 has come under severe criticisms from some scientists. Founder-director of the Hyderabad-based, Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB), Dr Pushpa M Bhargava, alleged that farmers in south India [the only area for which Bt cotton was approved] have suffered heavy losses on account of cultivation of Bt cotton.
Speaking to FE, Dr Bhargava, who is a Padma Bhushan awardee and also the chairman of Avon Organics, alleged that there are reports that apart from approved varieties of Bt cotton, unapproved varieties of several genetically modified crops (GM) are being sold to farmers.
There are reports of terminator seeds being sold to farmers, he said, adding: "One farmer came to me with some samples of sterile seeds and wanted me to test whether these are terminator seeds." Dr Bhargava urged the Centre to wake up to these happenings and take urgent steps to set up seed testing laboratories for testing unapproved GM seeds. He said that such tests should also be carried out to check the plorification of spurious seeds.
He alleged that the recent amendments to the Seeds Act is designed to strengthen the monopoly of multinational seed companies in the seed sector. He urged the Centre not to allow any multinational company in the seed sector. If the multinationals are allowed to enter the country’s seed sector it would spell disaster as they would be controlling country’s agriculture, he observed.
Dr Bhargava also alleged that attempts are being made to develop more hybrid seeds, so that farmers cannot save seeds for reuse in the next season. "Why can't scientists developed high yielding varieties of conventional seeds, by using the resources stored in gene banks?" he quipped.
"There is a lack of transparency in the approval process of Bt cotton. Revelant data are not yet placed in public domain. No tests have been conducted to verify the consumption effects of Bt plants on cattle. Bt toxin may have some undesired effects on bacteria present in rumen in cattle," he stated.
A field study conducted by Afsar H Jafri on behalf of Navdanya and the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology has revealed poor performance of Bt cotton in Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. The Secunderabad-based Centre for Sustainable Agriculture under the leadership of Dr GV Ramajanevulu has revealed poor performance of Bt cotton in Andhra Pradesh. Studies conducted by Greenpeace India and Gene Campaign reveal similar results.
------
2.MNCs, designers join lobbies against GM crops
http://www.deepikaglobal.com/ENG3_sub.asp?newscode=98419&catcode=ENG3&subcatcode=
New Delhi, Apr 3 (UNI) Western Multi-National Companies and Indian Fashion designers are to join hands with environmental activists to make the country a 'Genetically Modified Organism -- Free Zone'.
The campaign for making India a GMO-free zone will begin in two months, according to Indian environmentalists.
Indian activists have already asked American Sports goods giant Nike, international lifestyle brand Espirit and several domestic fashion designers the big question--If we launch a campaign, will you refuse to procure GM products for manufacturing your products? ''The answer was Yes. They will come on board when we start our campaign,'' says Vandana Shiva of Delhi-based environmental group Navdanya.
The Indian lobbies, who have raised fears of health hazard from GMO, will be supported in their action by European anti-GMO groups like Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace Europe. The campaign will also be targeting the Monsanto-owned GM crop BT cotton, presently being cultivated in six Indian states.
According to Dr Shiva, the campaign will be in three phases.
In the first phase, a ''People's Commission'' will be set up to spread awareness about the health and environmental hazards from GMO. The year-long phase also plans to bring back attention on farmers' suicides in Karnataka and Kerala last year.
The second phase will be, in fact, an extension of the global movement for a GMO-free zone. ''Presently, about 30,000 zones in Europe have been categorised as GMO-free zones,'' says Dr Shiva.
''In India, thousands of villages have already taken pledge not to plant GM seeds.'' The first genetically modified crop to be introduced in India three years ago, BT Cotton is cultivated in Gujarat, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. A month ago, six new varieties of transgenic cotton developed by domestic seed companies were allowed for cultivation in Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan.
The case for further extension of the GM crop in these six states will come up before the Genetical Engineering Approval Committee of the Ministry of Environment on April 13.
The campaign will focus in its last phase on making the GMO industry shift its base through intensifying protests. The case against Mahyco, the Indian subsidiary of multinational GM seeds company Monsanto Mahyco, in the Supreme Court will also receive the attention in this phase, according to Dr Shiva.
The lobbies also want to direct their campaign at the government to force it enact laws to label anything that is genetically engineered. "The labelling will help consumers identify whether the food they are buying is GM food or not,'' says Geert Ritsema of Friends of Earth Europe, which led a successful campaign to introduce a labelling law in Europe last year.
Besides legislations, the environmental groups also want facilities for conducting tests on GM foods to find out the risks.
------
3.Draft biotech policy draws criticism from NGOs
ASHOK B SHARMA
Financial Express, Monday, April 04, 2005
NEW DELHI, APRIL 3: The Centre's draft National Biotechnology Development Strategy has begun attracting criticisms from several civil society organisations for identifying development of 18 genetically modified (GM) crops and for not emphasising on adequate risk evaluation.
Incidentally, such criticisms have come from the member of the drafting committee Dr Suman Sahai, who is the sole representative in the panel from the NGO sector. The Centre has invited suggestions from the public on the draft by May 16. After reviewing these suggestions, the draft is slated to be finalised for implementation.
The draft document has called for development of transgenics in rice, wheat, maize, sorghum, pigeonpea, chickpea, moong bean (green gram), groundnut, mustard, soybean, cotton, sugarcane, potato, tomato, cole crops, banana, papaya and citrus. It said that priority target traits in crop plants would be yield increase, pest and disease resistance, abiotic stress tolerance, enhanced quality and shelf life, engineering male sterility and development of apomixis.
In case of hybrids, research on the introduction of genetic factors for apomixis would be supported so that resource-poor farmers can derive benefits from hybrid vigour without having to buy expensive seeds, every cropping season. The draft document has also proposed development of transgenic animals, aquaculture and genetically modified foods.
In this context, Dr Suman Sahai of Gene Campaign speaking from Paris said: "This policy has included practically all the suggestions of the industry and has ignored many areas of public concern. I had suggested that there should be crop specific strategies for developing transgenics, taking into account the export factor, environmental and health aspects. The need for keeping out biodiversity rich regions from the influence of transgenics should be emphasised."
She alleged that in the last February meeting it was decided that the minutes of the meeting would be discussed again before the release. "This did not happen," she alleged. She said that she had suggested to co-op other representatives from the civil society in the panel. But instead of doing so the panel preferred to hold a consultation with some NGOs through one its sub-committee.
However, the draft has suggested active involvement of civic society in decision-making process relating to transgenic crops. It said: "In general biopharmaceutical products seem to be better accepted than transgenic crops...hence there is a need to work actively and transparently to inform and engage the civic society in decision-making and to maintain a relationship of trust and confidence. The Centre and the industry must actively promote access to information on the benefits and risks in a balanced manner."
Realising that development of transgenics in agriculture is a contentious issue, the draft admitted "insufficient dialogue between scientists, industry, policymakers, regulators, consumers, civil society organisations and the mass media and lack of sufficiently proactive administrative machinery." As a matter of new strategey, the draft suggested involvement of local village bodies in the process of analysis and understanding the risks and benefits associated with GMOs.
The draft called for setting up of a training school for the judiciary with the help of the Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics, Hyderabad and imparting training through the National Law Schools and other similar institutes.
The draft contains several other contentious issues which has invited the ire of the civil society, particularly those provision relating to regulations. It said: An event (construct) that has already undergone extensive biosafety tests should not be treated as a new event if it is in a changed background....Where adequate evidence is available that the recurrent parent genetic background of a notified/registered genotype is nearly restored (through field data/molecular data), only the agronomic performance and the level and stability of the transgene expression may be analysed by two-year trial data by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR)."
Even in case of a structurally altered transgene with no significant modifications in protien conformation, the toxicity and allergenicity tests need not be carried out provided the predicted antigenic epitope remains the same and the level of expression of the transgene is within the defined limits, it added.
The draft proposed implementations of the recommendations of the MS Swaminathan panel on agri-biotech and RA Mashelkar panel on recombinant pharma. Accordingly it has proposed setting of "a competent single National Biotechnology Regulatory Authority with separate divisions for transgenic crops, recombinant drugs and industrial products, transgenic food and feed, transgenic animals and aquaculture."
Pending setting up of the new regulatory authority, the draft document suggested setting up of an inter-ministerial group in 2005 chaired by a reputed scientist to address anomalies and issues that arise in regulation from time to time. The promoter agency, department of biotechnology, will provide administrative support to this inter-ministerial body.
The draft document noted: "Majority of the genes under use - about 40% - are currently held by multinational companies and have been received under material transfer agreements for R&D purpose without clarity on the potential for commercialisation." It proposed that at least 30% of the government funded programmes must invite a private sector to commercialise its R&D efforts.
------
4.Greens ask India to keep out genetics from Europe export
ASHOK B SHARMA
Monday, April 04, 2005
http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=86988
NEW DELHI, APRIL 3:- "If you want to keep your exports to Europe up, keep out genetically modified organisms." This was the message conveyed at the conclusion of the two-day India-Europe Dialogue on GMOs and Biosafety in Delhi on Saturday.
This dialogue was organised jointly by EU-India Small Projects Facility, the UK-based Gaia Foundation, Greenpeace International, Friends of the Earth International and the Delhi-based Navdanya Trust. Interestingly, officials like Dan Leskien of the German Federal Ministry of Consumer Protection, Food and Agriculture were present in the discussions.
The Greenpeace International released a book entitled EU Markets: No Market for GM ”” Labelled Food in Europe. Dr Steve Emmott said: "Among EU members, Spain is the only country which grows GM crops i.e. two varieties of GM corn. Recently, Poland and Hungary have banned entry of GM crops and food."
Greet Ritsema of the Friends of the Earth, Europe said: "Under the European law GM foods, GM animal feed and GM seeds have to be labelled. European consumers are very sensitive to the adverse effects of GM food and feed. Even if they are labelled, the consumers do not accept it. If India decides to grow GM crops and if it intends to export to Europe, it has to label its products and ungergo traceability."
He urged that India should introduce labelling and traceability norms, if it intends to continue its exports to Europe. He also suggested introduction of a liability regime in India whereby the seed companies will be liable to compensate farmers for losses on account of GM crop cultivation. He said that this is necessary as India is fast adopting GM technology.
Eric Gall of Greenpeace Europe said: "Indian farmers should also be aware that there is widespread rejection of GM foods amongst consumers and food companies in Europe." "We will soon start generating awareness among farmers. A team of Andhra Pradesh farmers will shortly visit Punjab to convince them about the failure of Bt cotton," Dr Vandana Shiva of Navdanya Foundation stated.