If you are unfamiliar with this subject, click here first for a brief introduction.

Click here for more articles

National Post
Wed 26 Jan 2000

Green Luddites

The words "Miami Group" bring to mind images of a delegation of tanned thugs attending a summit of Mafia godfathers ("Joining us from Dade County, active in cement and sanitation rackets ..."). But in the context of this week's Biosafety Protocol negotiations in Montreal, the phrase has a less sinister connotation: It refers to the six countries -- Canada, United States, Argentina, Uruguay,
Australia and Chile -- fighting a deal that would allow nations to arbitrarily exclude genetically modified (GM) food imports.

The Miami Group nations argue that trade in GM food should be governed by the WTO standard, which blocks all restrictions on trade except those that are both "necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health" and "based on scientific principles." And they are correct to do so: As we argued on Monday, there is no evidence that GM technology is medically or environmentally dangerous. On the contrary, it provides improved food quality and holds the promise of ending Third World malnutrition and reducing soil erosion. Anti-GM sentiment, the phobic flavour of which is captured by the misleading epithet,
"Frankenfood," is the product of a misinformation campaign led by green NGOs, Greenpeace International most notably.

In the short term (the rest of this week) Canada must reject any deal that would compromise its right to export safe, high-tech food. But in the long term, the Miami Group needs new converts, at home and abroad, if it is to prevail. Our government, then, must pursue two strategies:

First, it should look for support among wavering nations. Britain must be its first target: It has the most advanced GM industry in Europe, yet it labours under the ideological thrall of the European Union, whose agricultural policies are animated by technophobic pastoralism.

Second, we should aggressively debunk the lies and propaganda that are fueling the anti-biotech movement domestically. Discredited reports concerning the Monarch butterfly and genetically modified potatoes, for instance, still appear prominently on anti-GM web sites. Because this material is accepted uncritically by many consumers, irrational fears are encouraged. NGOs then cite public
concern as evidence in favour of labeling -- even though this "concern" is the product of NGOs' own agitprop.

The fight promises to be a difficult one. Environmentalists are perceived as saintly do-gooders; and their motives are rarely questioned. But they should be. In Canada, agri-food accounts for over $20-billion in exports. We simply cannot allow that volume of trade to remain hostage to scientific disinformation.

Home / Overview / News Cuttings / Other Related Articles  / Contact