 |
July 23, 1999
The Agribusiness ExaminerMonsanto and Novartis:
Those Inglorious Devices for Obtaining Individual Profit Without Individual Responsibility
Proving in one country that it is not beneath cooperating in economic
blackmail while making it apparent in another country that it owes no
loyalty to national interests when it comes to market share, bioengineer
giant's Novartis and Monsanto continues to give new meaning to Ambrose
Bierce's classic definition of a corporation: "that inglorious device for
obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility."
In a recent affidavit by Monsanto and Novartis, Novartis threatens that if
Ireland does not permit the deliberate release of genetically modified
products, then "it may well become uneconomic for Novartis to continue to
supply traditional seed to the Irish market. Given the importance of
Novartis on the Irish market, this would have serious implications for the
Irish sugar beet industry."
Monsanto and Novartis both claim that any delays in the testing of their
product will cause them to lose "millions of pounds" of potential profits.
The companies are rushing to field test the sugar beets and get them on the
market before the patent runs out in 2011. Monsanto has applied for licenses
for five other field sites in areas all over the country.
On May 1, 1997 the Irish Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) granted
Monsanto the first license in Ireland for a deliberate release of
genetically modified organisms -- Roundup Ready sugar beet (a joint venture
between Monsanto and Novartis).
Clare Watson, founding member of Genetic Concern! sought a High Court
Judicial Review of the EPA's decision to grant the license. An interim
injunction prevented Monsanto from planting the genetically modified sugar
beets in the Carlow test site (a government research center), and a Judicial
Review was granted.
The injunction was later overturned, and Monsanto planted the genetically
modified sugar beets on the same day. Not long after, members of the Gaelic
Earth Liberation Front (GELF) destroyed the crop. The Judicial Review was
held on May 19, 1999. If the Court finds that the license was improperly
granted, then Monsanto will be forced to abandon its plans to field test the
genetically modified sugar beets.
The Roundup Ready sugar beets are designed to tolerate Monsanto's Roundup
herbicide a product that currently accounts for 90% of Monsanto sales in
Ireland. The sugar beets would be the first deliberate release of
genetically modified organisms in the country.
In Argentina, meanwhile, where 72.6% of the 1998/99 crop of soya was
genetically modified (GM), Lindsay Keenan, now working for Greenpeace UK and
who previously ran Genetix Food Alert, a group set up by the wholefood trade
in the United Kingdom who want to remain GM free, reports that Argentinean
farmers did not have to pay Monsanto any technology fee, that they did not
have to sign an agreement to use Round-up and that they could save the seeds
for use in the next season (indeed they had already been doing so).
Keenan notes that Martin Pietro from Greenpeace confirmed "that yes this was
also his understanding of the agreements in Argentina. This is interesting
because it would mean that Monsanto is having to forgo the $5 per bag of
seed (50lbs) that they currently charge farmers in the U.S. and Canada. In
addition, Monsanto is also currently prosecuting many U.S. farmers for
saving GM seeds.
"Clearly the cost benefit of Monsanto's package will depend upon the actual
price that Monsanto is selling the package for," Keenan adds, "and if they
sell it cheaply enough it will be more interesting to farmers. Economically
and agronomically there is no particular reason why Monsanto should be able
to sell these products at a reduced rate. In fact the increased costs of the
biotechnology involved have indeed led to increases in the basic seed plus
weedkiller package for farmers in the U.S. and Canada." |