 |
Field of Genes: pt 5: Lyle Vanclief Interview AVRIL
BENOIT (CBC): Now we'll wrap our series on genetically modified foods, and we turn to the
question of the role of government in ensuring the
safety of Canadians.
My guest in the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lyle Vanclief. He's
been a supporter and promoter of biotech industries in Canada. At the same time, he is the
Minister responsible for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, which enforces food safety
for consumers. He is in Ottawa.
Good morning.
LYLE VANCLIEF (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada): Good morning, Avril.
BENOIT: I appreciate you coming in.
VANCLIEF: Great. My pleasure.
BENOIT: Well ,we've been covering many, many issues over the course of the
week, and I know that you left farming in Ontario for political office in
1988, well before all these genetically engineered crops came along. You must shake your
head in wonder sometimes, at what they can do on farms these days?
VANCLIEF: Well, not really, Avril. I mean, the science has been advancing the
ability of producers all over the world to produce food for an ever-increasing
population for many, many decades. We've always had science moving things
forward and science is still moving and using its ability in many different
ways.
BENOIT: But the pace of science has increased over the last few years, has it
now?
VANCLIEF: The pace of science and agriculture, and the production of
agriculture products and food has increased over the last number of years, but
I think when we look at the pace of research and technology in any sector of
our economy it's moving very rapidly as well. But there's no question, in all
fields it's moving much faster than it, can I say, probably was not that many
years ago.
BENOIT: Well, that's the thing. Many farmers in Canada are using genetically
modified crops. Can you tell me approximately how many, how important, for
example, this industry is to Canada's economy right now?
VANCLIEF: Well, the whole agriculture and agri-food industry is about nine
percent of the Gross Domestic Product, but for me to break it down to say what
percentage of all production in... or basic production in Canada has any
involvement with any genetic enhancement I'm not sure. I know that in some crops, such as
canola, there's a fair percentage of it that has... is being planted now using genetically
enhanced varieties. In corn there is certainly some. In others there is very little, and
in some...a lot of them there's none.
BENOIT: Well, there's certainly more here than we find in Europe. We began
our series on Monday with a look at how Europeans have reacted to biotech foods. It's been
described as a meltdown in public confidence and in some countries nine out of ten
consumers say they won't buy biotech foods.
What are the consequences of this European position, mindset, for Canadian
farmers who are trying to export?
VANCLIEF: Well, I think we need to be very careful and responsible in all of
this, Avril, and that we make and we base decisions based on science rather
than based on emotion. There's information that's out there, concern that's
out there, that is not always based on science. And it doesn't matter whether it's
this issue or anything else. We have to base it on the best technology and the
best science that's there.
BENOIT: Right, but big grocery chains in Europe, grocery stores, are refusing
to stock any genetically modified food because their customers don't want it.
VANCLIEF: Well that's a business decision that they're making. And they
have a right to do that. There's no question of that. If a consumer doesn't want a
buy product X or has indicated that to a grocery chain, well then the grocery
chain makes a business decision not to take up shelf space to put that product
there. But you know, we have, and you said at the outset of the show that I was a promoter
of biotechnology. I'm not a promoter of biotechnology. I'm a promoter of anything that we
can do that is based on sound science. And based on a regulatory system which we do have
in Canada, which is one of the best in the world; one that the rest of the world is coming
to see and find out how we do
this, and that regulatory system is based on science, and based on safety.
Safety to the environment, safety to animals and safety to humans. And that is
the important thing.
Now if people, as a result of that, wish not to buy a product I mean, there
are other products, whether they're food products or not, that people make a
decision that even though they're deemed to be safe as a piece of equipment or
whatever it is, they say they don't wish to buy that product. But the safety
aspect is reviewed, and must be reviewed, based on the best science that we
have available to us today.
BENOIT: Well, we've looked into how the science is reviewed, and much of it
comes from industry data. And that is why the public increasingly is starting
to reject the claims that it's absolutely safe. They're listening to those
other scientists, those who seem to be on the outside of the system, who say,
look, there hasn't been enough research done.
VANCLIEF: Well, when the results of research is... or a product, and I've
referred to it as that, is someone comes forward and wants to register that
product for sale, then that research is reviewed by a group of scientists,
experts from a diversity of disciplines and it is reviewed based on national
and international expert advice.
If they do not come forward with the information that is required and that
information is not satisfactory if there's any question of the validity and
the soundness of the research and the results of that research that is put
forward, the product just simply isn't registered. You can't get a more sound system than
that. And as I say it, I keep repeating this, that's based on the most
sound science that is available today.
BENOIT: In business terms though, the impact of... you call it sound science,
European consumers don't seem convinced by the science that they are able to
read up on, to the extent that the Canadian canola, for example, that you
mentioned, cannot be sold in Europe in so many of these countries because we
can't seem to separate the non-genetically modified from the genetically
modified. What could be done to actually sell our products over there in a
non-genetically modified form?
VANCLIEF: Well, it's a decision that they have made, that they have not
accepted the science. Through the WTO, for example, they cannot continue to do that unless
they can demonstrate that the science is not sound. And to that
extent they have not done that yet. They have simply just made the
statement so far that they refuse to accept the products there.
The other case in point is the beef hormones, the beef produced with
assistance. The European scientific community and committee have said that
there is no basis for the rejection that the...
BENOIT: For... you're talking about bovine growth hormone.
VANCLIEF: That's right. And that there is no basis for that and that the food
produced in that way is not harmful to humans.
BENOIT: But don't they have the right to refuse food they don't want to eat?
VANCLIEF: They have the right... they don't have to pick it up off the shelf,
no. They don't have to. They have that right. They certainly do. But... and
that's an individual decision that they have, and I don't have... and I have
the right not to purchase a certain automobile if I think it may flip over
or I don't think it will suit me in the use that I want, whether that be human
consumption or another product. That doesn't mean to say that the automobile
has not passed all of the safety standards that are being used at that time.
BENOIT: But I guess there's some... is there some concern that the safety
standards have not been applied as they are in other cases? Or as people would
expect that they would be. That there's public rejection, it could spread to
Canada.
VANCLIEF: Well, the public has the right to reject, there's no question of
that whatsoever, Avril. They have the right to reject. But I can assure you
that we have the most sound regulatory process for the review of the science,
based, as I said, on the review of that, on national and international expert
advice. I don't know how much further anybody can go on that, and then
science... scientists from a broad diversity of disciplines review that.
And if there's any question whatsoever in the validity of that, if all of the answers
are not given by that, then the product is not registered.
BENOIT: So based on all this science that you cite, you are a 100 per cent
confident that it's safe?
VANCLIEF: There's no such thing as a 100 per cent confident in, Avril,
absolutely never. We can base it on the best science today, and then what you
do is if science changes tomorrow, if the science changes next week, you
review that. But there's no such thing in life as 100 per cent risk free. It doesn't
matter what it is.
BENOIT: So how confident are you?
VANCLIEF: I'm very, very, very confident.
BENOIT: There is some new science from England. Dr. Pusztai has found that
genetically modified food damaged the immune system of rats. He's alarmed by
that, he'd like to see more research done. Will your officials review those
findings?
VANCLIEF: Well, the first thing I want to point out is that the potatoes that
he was working with shows that the system does work. Those potatoes were not registered
for production. So that shows that the system works. And so I don't know what more I can
say. If somebody wants to come forward and science comes forward and says that he was
wrong, or the research was wrong and that they are, then science and all those reviewing
it will take a look at it. But the bottom line is that as far as I'm concerned this is
blown out of proportion
because nobody says that as a result of the work that was done and the review
of that, that product was not registered. So the consumer can rest comfortably
that they weren't registered.
BENOIT: But other potatoes are registered, and he says that he found
significant differences, for example.
VANCLIEF: Certainly there are significant differences between two potatoes. I
know lots of people that say they don't want to eat anything but Yukon Gold
potatoes. I see other people that don't want to eat anything but a red-skinned
potato, or whatever the case. And because there's differences in potatoes,
there always have been differences in potatoes, difference in flavour,
different in texture, and that's because the nutritional makeup of those
potatoes and the quality of those potatoes are different.
An apple isn't an apple. There's certainly a difference between a McIntosh
apple and a Red Delicious apple.
BENOIT: Yeah, but we're talking...
VANCLIEF: Yeah, but the genetic makeup is different between them. But you
know, so the science has to check and if there is a... if there is a change to
the genetic makeup the regulatory process reviews that change, and if it is
deemed by the scientific community, reviewing the science, that the product is
safe, then the registration is given. But if it isn't deemed to be safe then
the registration for the production of that product is not given.
BENOIT: One of the concerns that has been raised as part of our series is
that your department works so closely with biotech companies, not only receiving money
from them in terms of the work that you're supposed to do in research, but also in
co-ordinating public relations messages about biotechnology. What is your relationship to
these companies?
VANCLIEF: We, through a program called the Matching Investment Initiative, we have
programs with... for research in collaboration. If an individual
organization, whether it be the Western Research Foundation or the Ontario
Corn Growers Association, or a private enterprise comes forward and says that
there's a requirement, or they feel that there's a requirement for research
and development in a certain area, whether that be with... in reflection to a
herbicide, whether that be in reference, for example, to pharmaceuticals,
meaning working on a species of a plant or something to make it more healthy
for humans. That is reviewed. And in that program there is joint funding if
the process... if there's a contract that's signed on that.
BENOIT: But you collaborate not only in the messages, but in terms of the...
so you're working with these companies to help them get their messages about
biotechnology out there, and you're working to allow for the approval of their
products, and yet you're also the regulator. You're supposed to be looking...
VANCLIEF: We help them... we help them and work with them in the research and when the end
of the research is done if there's a result of that, that is
deemed by them to be request... let's say a request for registration of that
product, then there is a review by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency which
is, yes, is responsible to the Minister of Agriculture, but is not connected in
any, way shape or form...
BENOIT: Do the other roles.
VANCLIEF: To the other roles.
BENOIT: Then, in your mind, whose interests come first, the biotech
companies, or the people.
VANCLIEF: The safety... neither one... well, the people. It's the safety of
the results of anything that's requested for the people.
BENOIT: That's absolutely your priority.
VANCLIEF: Absolutely, total priority. Absolutely. Canadian Food Inspection
Agency checks and reviews the science for the safety of the use of the product
for animals and for the environment and the Minister of Health checks for the
safety of the product for humans. And then if a product is registered, or
whatever is done, then the Food Inspection Agency monitors and enforces the
regulations that are put in place.
BENOIT: What is your position on labelling then?
VANCLIEF: My position on labelling is that what we have at the present
time in Canada, the producers and marketers of food can put on the label anything they
want.
BENOIT: The government doesn't require labelling of genetically modified
foods. Why not?
VANCLIEF: The government... the government requires labelling of genetically
modified foods in Canada if the nutrition of the product has changed or if
there's an allergenic reason for doing so.
BENOIT: But if there are unknown consequences because they have not been in
our diets for very long, if there haven't been enough studies of what the
impact of these foods are on us, why wouldn't that be on the label?
VANCLIEF: Well, Avril, nobody knows, for example, what is going to happen if we, 20 years
down the road, 10 years down the road. As I go back to the same thing as I said at the
beginning, we have to base the decisions based on the
most sound and the best science we have available today. If science changes
then we have to... and we always do review any decisions that have been
made in the past. Producers of food and marketers of food can put on the label
voluntarily whatever they want. If a consumer questions the legitimacy of that label then
the role of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency is to review the claims that have been
made on that product by the manufacturer of that product, and if it's been fraudulently
done then the enforcement is taken through the proper channels.
BENOIT: Mr. Vanclief, I'm sorry, we have to let you go. The news is coming
up, but thank you very much for your time.
VANCLIEF: Okay, thank you very much, Avril.
BENOIT: Bye bye. Lyle Vanclief, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.
He was in Ottawa. |