News 
 National Rural News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 General 
 Anti-GM lobby claims a win in Tasmania 

Anti-GM lobby claims a win in Tasmania

29 Aug, 2008 03:04 PM
The Gene Ethics network is claiming a win for the anti-genetically modified crop movement, applauding a Tasmanian Government all-party committee report which recommends that prohibition on the release of GM food crops be extended for another five years.

If adopted, the moratorium on GM crops in that state would not be reviewed until the end of the five year period.

Gene Ethics director Bob Phelps says a GM ban in Tasmania would isolate the "rogue states" of Victoria and NSW, which have allowed commercial GM canola crops to be grown this year.

"Most states and the vast majority of their citizens want to stay GM-free," Mr Phelps claimed.

"To match the Tasmanian, WA, SA and ACT GM bans and to restore the uniform system of national GM regulation, the GM states should re-impose their GM bans immediately.

"GM-free states grow over 60pc of Australia's canola and will reap the rewards of free access to all markets for their GM-free products."

Mr Phelps said a "zero tolerance" policy for GM contamination in imported grains, seeds, plant products and animal feed was the only way to ensure "a secure GM-free future".

The Tasmanian report recommended that the State Government should:

* back independent scientific testing of GM foods on human health and safety;

* call on the Australian government for national surveillance of GM's health and safety;

* ask Food Standards Australia for tough human safety testing, like that for new drugs; and

* improve labelling of food products derived from GM crops.

A full copy of the report is available at: http://www.parliament.tas.gov.au/ CTEE/genetech.htm

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
With GM becoming "popular" (not sure there this a choice) in most parts of the world, particularly America and Africa, you would think Australia, would see the trend those countries are going.

The demand for organic produce, especially in south asia, Japan and the advantage of Australia being an island, which is a natural buffer from contamination of any sort, would create an Australian own niche market.

Seize an opportunity and becoming totally organic.

Ask a farmer in Italy to use GM or chemicals on his crops and you will soon know how stupid your question is. Italy is known for their quality organic produce and it is possible Australia could have this too.

Possibly we'd surpass this, as we did with the French in wine making.

Posted by Jay, 29/08/2008 7:27:21 PM
Thank goodness for some reason...thank goodness for some Tasmanian good plain practical sense. Consumers like myself will not buy GM food and we demand better labeling.

Farmers need to know that any market they may dream exists for GM is a mirage - it really doesn't exist.

I live in NSW, where will my GM-free food comes from. We need independent scientific testing on human health and safety...not to be the nation's animal-human testing lab.

I do not want to be part of an random experiment that risks so much. I do not want to drink milk from cows feed GMOs.

NSW needs to reconsider its position on GMOs. How soon will it be before all canola from NSW is "contaminated", the market falls and the land can't be reused for other crops.

And do we know the ongoing effects of GMOs on the land the soil. The Canadian's and USA suffer from GMO contamination.

The international markets will buy from Tasmania. Anywhere but NSW and Vic.

I will support my GMO-free farmers...looks like I'm buying more Tasmanian.

Posted by catmac, 1/09/2008 9:19:05 AM
GM crops have been grown for 10 years and not one incident has occurred that would indicate that GM crops are unsafe in any way.

Yet the Green fundamentalists continue to force their views on farmers.

Farmers in Canada, India, China and America are all laughing at farmers in Australia who are still not utilising the benefits of GM, which include higher yields, lower costs and significant reductions in chemical pesticides!

Our GM free canola is sold at the same price as GM canola and the two are blended so there is no benefit for anyone of staying GM free.

Australian farmers should stand up to the Green fundamentalists and get access to this technology because the rest of the world is racing ahead of us and we are being left behind for no scientific reasons at all. It is simply because the Greenies have got the louder more hysterical lobbyists.

Posted by Don, 1/09/2008 9:52:00 AM
Above all other parts of Australia the island of Tasmania stands to benefit from its non GM status. It will assit it in building on its name for clean, ultra high quality food
Posted by gr, 1/09/2008 11:08:01 AM
Tasmania doesn't grow canola other than for seed production (because it is isolated) so this really isn't much of a victory for professional activists like Mr Phelps.

But I guess they need to convince their donors that they are fighting and winning - otherwise the donations would stop coming in and Mr Phelps would be out of a job. I'd like to see some evidence behind the claim that most states and the vast majority of citizens want to remain GM free.

Posted by Dan, 1/09/2008 11:17:56 AM
Thanks God there is still someone out there interested in our environment and independent research!
Posted by Farmer Janet, 1/09/2008 1:15:55 PM
Bob Phelps should come clean on his anti-GM stance. I reckon Gene Ethics is a front for the Australian Conservation Foundation.

Phelps shares an address and a fax number with the ACF. I wonder: is he paid by them to whip up fear about GM crops and food because it generates funds for ACF and Gene Ethics?

Tasmania was always going to oppose GM crops - they prefer to operate in niche markets.

And Bob forgot to mention the other "rogue state" - Queensland. Three of the biggest states in Australia allow GM crops - that's almost half the nation.

The ALP Governments in WA and SA oppose them only to win votes in urban seats. They don't care about the bush.

Posted by Pamela, 1/09/2008 5:34:51 PM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
POLL
Q: Do you support AWB's decision to extend the voting period for its push to restructure the shareholding system?

Yes
(48%)

No
(41%)

Undecided
(11%)

Total Votes: 273
Poll Date: 24 August, 2008

Most popular articles

ELDERS NEWS MREC SJ



Stock & Land







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...