News received with "shock, disbelief, and anguish"
India's central government faces strong opposition over its decision to allow field trials of different GM crops in the absence of competent regulation and biosafety protections.
Critics also point to the less than stellar performance of India's only commercialised GMO crop to date, Bt cotton. A report issued by the Agriculture Standing Committee questioned the government’s claims of farm incomes increasing on account of Bt cotton. Based on first-hand experience gained from farm visits, the Committee noted that only indebtedness and risks had arisen and there was “ample proof to show that the miseries of farmers have compounded since the time they started cultivating Bt cotton”.
For what's wrong with field trials in India, see this analysis by Kavitha Kuruganti:
http://indiagminfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/FTs-of-GMOs-kk-biosafety-course.pdf
EXCERPT: While most states have rejected field trials on their soil, the agriculturally important states of Punjab, Haryana, Maharashtra, and Andhra Pradesh have allowed confined field trials. Several issues relating to insurance for crop failures, liability of promoter companies for ecological damage, toxicity tests on GM crops, antibiotic resistance, impact on native biodiversity, and public health all remain unresolved.
1. RSS, civil group condemn Modi govt. for allowing field trial of GM crops
2. #DNAEdit: Tearing hurry
---
1. RSS, civil group condemn Modi govt. for allowing field trial of GM crops
India Tomorrow, 21 July 2014
http://www.indiatomorrow.net/eng/rss-civil-group-condemn-modi-govt-for-allowing-field-trial-of-gm-crops
The Central government is facing strong opposition from various corners for its decision to allow field trial of different genetically modified (GM) crops. The Coalition for a GM-Free India termed the approval ‘hasty’ and asked the Minister for Environment, Forests & Climate Change to cancel it. Swadeshi Jagaran Manch (SJM), the economic wing of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh – the parent body of ruling BJP, termed the decision of the Narendra Modi government as ‘betrayal of people’s trust’.
“SJM has received the news reports of approval of field trials of GM food crops by Genetically Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), under the Union Ministry of Environment & Forest, with shock, disbelief and anguish,” Dr. Ashwani Mahajan, All India co-convener of SJM said.
On Thursday GEAC reportedly approved 60 out of 70 applications for field trial of GM crops. The decision was taken at a time when a public litigation is pending before Supreme Court and Technical Expert Committee (TEC) appointed by the apex court has already submitted its report wherein, it is believed, the committee has strongly recommended stopping of all such field trials.
“People of India who have elected BJP to power are feeling deceived. They had voted BJP to power on the promises the party made to the people of India in its manifesto 2014 and speeches made by the leaders during the election campaign,” the statement of Sangh outfit reads.
BJP had promised in its election manifesto that GM food will not be allowed without evaluation of its long term effects.
“SJM wants to remind the government that moratorium on open field trials of GM food crops was the result of long and difficult struggle by people of India including Swadeshi Jagran Manch, farmers, scientific experts, consumers activists and other stakeholders. The Supreme Court of India has also been of the clear view that no hasty decision in this regard shall be taken that puts the health of people and soil at risk,” it added.
These 70 applications were put on hold by former environment minister Jayanti Natarajan of Congress.
During the Congress government the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture which includes seven members from BJP, also recommended against trial of GM crops.
The Coalition for a GM-Free India says that most of the countries are not having GM crops because they carry several health risks.
“When most countries around the world are not adopting this risky technology which has a large number of attendant risks to health, environment, and livelihoods, and when several credible official bodies in India have asked for a stopping of field trials, it is extremely irresponsible that our apex biotechnology regulator has thrown such caution to the winds to approve open air field trials,” a statement from the coalition reads.
---
2. #DNAEdit: Tearing hurry
Editorial
DNAIndia, 22 July 2014
http://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/editorial-dnaedit-tearing-hurry-2004462
* By clearing field trials of several GM food crops, India takes another step towards commercial release without reliable regulators, safeguards or risk studies
By authorising field trials for 15 more genetically modified (GM) food crops, India has signalled its intention of fast-tracking its use of GM technology. India has only the highly contested commercial precedent of Bt-cotton, a cash crop, to rely on when clearing field trials for major food crops like rice, wheat, brinjal, chickpea and mustard. Rather than be cautious by experimenting with soybean, corn and canola which offers oil and feed post-processing, biotech regulator Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee(GEAC) has cleared a rash of proposals for nearly 60 GM food crops in three meetings held since March.
Interestingly, for a year prior, an unofficial moratorium seemed to be at work, with the GEAC not meeting even once. In contrast to Jairam Ramesh and Jayanthi Natarajan who chose to err on the side of caution, their successor in the environment ministry Veerappa Moily had no such qualms in rebooting the GEAC meetings. This was despite a Supreme Court-appointed Technical Expert Committee and two reports by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture advocating a moratorium and castigating the absence of adequate regulatory structures, scientific expertise and rigorous scientific studies.
What gives credence to the contentions of activists opposed to GM crops is the government’s failure to set up a regulatory system free of conflicts of interest. In the present set-up, an internal bio-safety committee in biotech companies performs the basic assessments, evaluations and generates data on the company’s transgenic products. The Department of Biotechnology(DBT) which funds research into GM crops in both public and private sectors has an adjunct, the Review Committee on Genetic Manipulation(RCGM), which analyses this data submitted by the companies before forwarding it to the GEAC for final clearances. Both the chairpersons of the GEAC are bureaucrats — the chair, an additional secretary in the environment ministry and the co-chair, a DBT official. The Parliamentary Standing Committee took objection to this structure that places implicit trust on the two stakeholders: the industry and the DBT besides privileging babus over scientists. The government’s failure to enact the Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India Bill and ensure statutory backing for the regulator before clearing so many field trials is problematic too.
While most states have rejected field trials on their soil, the agriculturally important states of Punjab, Haryana, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh have allowed confined field trials. Several issues relating to insurance for crop failures, liability of promoter companies for ecological damage, toxicity tests on GM crops, antibiotic resistance, impact on native biodiversity and public health all remain unresolved. Such adhocism betrays a cavalier attitude to a sector that offers the promise of food security but remains enmeshed in a vicious cycle of mutual recriminations by governments, biotech corporations and activists. The controversial past of the industrial leader, Monsanto, and the government’s failure to make public the detailed minutes of GEAC meetings including dissensions, and the fears of hyper-commercialisation rendering agriculture unviable to the small farmer cloud the debate further. The Agriculture Standing Committee’s 59th report submitted in March questioned the government’s claims of farm incomes increasing on account of Bt cotton. Based on first-hand experience gained from farm visits, the Committee noted that only indebtedness and risks had risen and there was “ample proof to show that the miseries of farmers have compounded since the time they started cultivating Bt Cotton”. While no one can be against research that offers overwhelming benefits for the human race, the evidence in support of GM crops is, presently, scanty at best.