UN Biosafety Talks: The Fight for the
Right to Say
No to GMOs
FoE EWNI Background Info for Press, Jan
10, 2000
Key international discussions on
regulating the world trade in genetically
modified organisms (GMOs) will take place in
Montreal from the 24th to 28th January
(informal discussions begin on 20th January).
A "Conference of the Parties" under the
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
Convention on Biological Diversity will meet
to discuss a proposed Biosafety Protocol.
This briefing explains what the Protocol is,
why it is important, how negotiations have
proceeded in the past, and what is likely to
happen in Montreal.
FoE experts will be present in Montreal
throughout the talks (
contact details
at the end of
this briefing note). Our London office will
also be able to offer informed
comment.
What is the Biosaftey Protocol?
The proposed Biosafety Protocol would
allow national governments to regulate trade
in GMOs. It would enable them to restrict
trade in GMOs on environmental or health
grounds, and set rules on liability and
labelling. It would protect the interests
both of consumers and of primary food
producers, and set limits to the activities
of multinational biotech companies.
What's Happened So Far?
There has been great resistance to
agreement on international regulation of
GMOs, particularly from the United States,
which expects to be a world leader in GM
technology.
• at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, the USA
refused to become a signatory of the UN
Convention on Biological Diversity
(CBD)
• In Jakarta in 1995, countries which had
signed the CBD agreed to begin discussions on
a Biosafety Protocol. Ideas discussed
included Advance Informed Agreement (AIA) -
enabling countries to be notified of and
hence approve or refuse imports of GMOs - and
a Biotechnology Clearinghouse to allow
sharing of information between
countries
• in Cartagena in 1999, talks on the
Protocol broke down due to the blocking
actions of a small group of GMO and grain
exporting countries including the
USA
• in Vienna in September 1999, an informal
meeting of the parties in Vienna
established that political will for a
protocol still existed, and further
negotiations were scheduled for January 2000
in Montreal. A full Conference of the Parties
of the CBD is set for May 2000 in
Nairobi
• in Seattle in November 1999, an attempt
was made by the European Commission and the
US Administration to include biotechnology in
the remit of the World Trade Organisation
(WTO). This would have the effect of making
trade in GMOs subject to "free trade" rules,
and would greatly restrict the right of
national Government to restrict GMO imports.
The attempt was blocked after protests by
NGOs including Friends of the Earth, and by
EU environment ministers led by Michael
Meacher. Controversy over GMOs was an
important factor in the collapse of the WTO
talks.
Key Issues:
• should the Protocol have a "savings
clause" – to allow countries to bring GMO
related trade disputes before the WTO? In
Cartagena, the El Salvador representative
called this idea a "protocol for
biotrade"
• should GMOs for use in food, feed and
processing (commodities) be included, or
should the rules only apply to the small
percentage of GMOs intended for other uses
such as seed? Should products derived from
GMOs, but without GM DNA, be included –
for example food containing GM soya
ingredients?
• how should the precautionary principle
apply to GMOs? In the draft Protocol, there
is only a reference to the "precautionary
approach" in the preamble
• should socio–economic considerations be
taken into account in risk assessments – for
example, the impacts on non-GM farmers'
livelihoods of the importation and growing of
GM seed?
• should GMOs intended for "contained use"
be included – for example GMOS intended for
use in a glasshouse or laboratory, or even
GMOs that are contained by a non-physical
barrier (such as a trait that can only
be switched on by chemical
applications)?
• should the Protocol address issues of
liability and redress? To date it has only
been possible to agree to adopt a "process"
to resolve this issue at some time in the
future.
• should the handling, transport conditions,
packaging and labelling of GMOs should be
regulated?
Other issues previously debated include:
illegal traffic, risk management,
whether trade with "non-parties" (such as
USA) should be blocked, minimum national
standards, segregation, the use of simplified
procedures and freedom of
information.
Who Wants What?
There are five main negotiating
blocks:
1. The Miami Group (USA, Canada, Australia,
Argentina, Uruguay and Chile)
This group would like to exclude commodities
(90% of GMOs) from the agreement. It
also
wants a "savings clause" which would protect
its "rights" under other international
agreements, in particular, the WTO.
Essentially the Group takes a "free trade"
position.
2. The Like Minded Group (over 100
developing countries, including
China)
This group wants to ensure that the Protocol
covers all GMOs, including those for food,
feed and commodities and contained use. It
wants countries which wish to export their
GMOs to get consent in advance from the
country which will receive them.
3. The European Union
The EU essentially wants to resume
negotiations where they broke off in
Cartagena. It states it is determined to
reach an agreement that includes GMOs for
food, feed or processing as well as for
cultivation and an "adequate" authorisation
procedure. It may well decide to
live with the current compromise on the
precautionary principle and liability. It is
not clear how much further will the EU
compromise in order to get an agreement; in
particular on the relationship between trade
and Biosafety. A return to anything like the
compromise offered to the US at the WTO talks
in Seattle (see above) would be highly
controversial.
4. The Compromise Group (Switzerland,
Norway, New Zealand and others)
This group claim to be playing a bridging
role: they are not necessarily agreed on all
points but prepared to broker
compromises.
5. The Central and Eastern
Europeans
To date this group has acted in concert with
the LMG.
What do We Want?
Key points which Friends of the Earth
International (the world's largest
environment network, with groups in 61
countries) wants to see in the Protocol
include:
• The right to say no to GMOs in food.
Imports of GMOs should be subject to advanced
informed agreement based on the precautionary
principle; all types of GMOs (including
commodities and those for contained
use) should be subject to the Protocol;
handling, transport conditions, packaging and
labelling should be subject to regulation;
and there should be a central registry of GMO
and biotechnology activities such as research
and development, laboratory and field
testing, market release, intra- and
inter-country transfers and
disposal
• Biosafety first - trade second. The
Protocol should not be subordinate to the WTO
or other trade agreements
• Polluter pays. The Protocol should include
an international regime of unlimited
liability covering all damage that may arise
from GMOs, including damage to health and the
environment
• A fair deal for developing countries. The
Protocol should provide for special and
differential treatment for developing
countries and economies in transition,
including increased transfer of technical
assistance and GMO monitoring
capability.
Contacts:
Liana Stupples
Campaigns Director, FoE EWNI
Tel: 44 171 490 1555
Fax: 44 171 490 0881
e-mail:
lianas@foe.co.uk
Adrian Bebb
Food & Biotech Campaigner, FoE EWNI
Tel: 44 171 490 1555/113 242 8153
e-mail:
adrianb@foe.co.u
k
Ian Willmore & Neil
Verlander
Media Unit , FOE EWNI
Tel: 44 171 566 1649
e-mail:
ianw@foe.co.uk
neilv@foe.co.uk
|
