The thing that GM companies want is to refuse anyone the choice to buy other than their own brand. That is exactly why any effort to refuse the claim that a crop is GM-free is is being distorted on the GM companies' behalf at the grass roots level.

The beginning of the end!. There is no doubt that the introduction of GM canola has been very well planned a long way in advance. Monsanto's very well oiled marketing machine has deflected the truth from the real agenda. There are two areas which I believe are the real drive and they are: The Government does not want to fund agriculture research and GM companies are the answer to their financial problems. The river of money from one-sided legal contracts tieing farmers not only into growing this rubbish but also having to purchase any chemical (their own brand) involved in production, right through to now controlling the delivery system. David Ginns is nothing more than a puppet in this GM deal and to add more insult, they are going to charge NON-GM producers a fee for the privilege. State by State the exact same plan is being unleashed with Redman WA's sellout. The sites have been announced, TWO delivery points are in place, and let me guess CBH in 2010 will take and mix canola anywhere. SA here it comes like it or not. Klein's banter has already started and with all the farmer representative bodies with their strategically place PRO-GM members on peak bodies like the Australian Oilseed Federation, it's no wonder the poor old average farmer has no hope of doing anything about this, other than to just not grow any GM crops at all. The ABARE report that focuses on higher yeild's for GM, delivering huge amounts of money to the grain sector, has been totally discredited by the NVT trial data report on GM Canola (2008) which proves there is NO benefit in growing it to the individual producer's bank account!!!!

It's interesting that Gregor Heard reports that 'ANTI-GM campaigners continue to noisily protest'. That word 'noisily' is intended to indicate a rabble, whereas the pro GM forces, of course, are calm and courteous.

Well, when you've got the money and the ear of government, you can whisper

Well spotted, John Newton. It's all in the wording! But who could blame them if they were noisy?

In WA, over the last six months GM free groups have presented Redman with over 27,000 petition signatures to maintain the moratorium, 8,000 postcards for strict liability, held rallies, called meetings, hosted international farmers' forums, met with Japanese consumer groups, and had meetings with ministers.

GM canola was voted illegal by the Upper House, and almost 20 shires have declared themselves GM free zones with the promise that the minister would honour these choices.

And the minister's response has been to say that he will not allow such decisions to block his plans. He has chosen to ignore these actions, along with the Carpenter Government Industry reports on GM cotton and canola, the latter not yet released.

Perhaps they are not being noisy enough!

I'm curious as to what the big opposition is to GM canola, or GM foods in general? I read an interesting paper on CSA about GM foods and think that it presents both sides fairly well. You should all have a read: http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/gmfood/overview.php

I do think that steps need to be taken to ensure that GM crops don't have a negative effect on the environment, and also the patent system needs to be looked at to ensure that the big bad multinationals don't bleed the little guys dry.

But other than that, what's the big deal? "Genetically-modified foods have the potential to solve many of the world's hunger and malnutrition problems, and to help protect and preserve the environment by increasing yield and reducing reliance upon chemical pesticides and herbicides."

Innovation and progression - it's the only way to keep living.

Dear Curious, it was interesting to hear your thoughts on GM food, but I am now curious as to why you should use as reference a website that is 9 years old. Although it is worth noting that nine years later none of the GM traits promoted on the site have eventuated. There are still no drought resistant, salt tolerant, higher yielding, more nutritious or pharmaceutical GM crops in existance. However, the list of concerns such as contamination, outcrossing, superweeds, increase in chemical usage and health problems have all become a reality from GM crops. I suggest that you update your knowledge by looking at these sites. http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/GeneticRoulette/Healt hRisksofGMFoodsSummaryDebate/index.cfm and http://www.bangmfood.org/feed-the-world/17-feeding-the-world /6-gm-no-solution-to-global-hunger to find out why there is such widespread concern. Innovation and progression usually means making things better, and GM crops have failed to do this.

Historically GrainCorp hasn’t been able to keep wheat or barley out of the canola. How the hell do they plan to keep canola out of the canola?

"Curious" doesn't strike me as very curious at all! If he/she was curious surely a little reading would be enough to change curiousity for alarm. Reading the comments passing between Bob Phelps and Dr Tong, one thing stands out---Dr Tong is being paid by a pro GM organisation and therefore will profit by it's introduction. Not so with Bob Phelps.

The one thing common to those who would rip you off is they all start by telling you how good their product will be for you! And how rich it will make you. A recipe sure to rope in the suckers! Our government is supposed to protect us against this type of exploitation. Renowned scientist Allan Chartres has noted, twenty five years and countless millions of dollars spent, and no drought resistant or bountiful crops have emerged. How stupid can we be?

John Newton's comment says it all. I say bring on the noise... I will use volume, oh and I will not buy GMO contaminated products and I will let everyone know why. I and many other consumers, will not buy. Then maybe growers may have wished they listened to the noisily protests as will the rest of our community when the food system is irretrievably ruined.

Creeker comments re Dr Tong and Bob Phelps are valid, except we don't know who pays Bob Phelps and why are they paying him to do what he does. So if Dr Tong is paid by a pro GM organisation that will profit, it's clear and common relationship; it's the unknown supporters of Bob Phelps and why are they hiding?