Food safety Western Australia style

I do not consult for ag biotech companies, I have never had a grant or contract from ag biotech companies, I have never worked for them, with them, or collaborated with them. I do not own and have never owned stock in a biotech company.

… It might be wise to point out that it isn’t just a handful of scientists which Chance asserts are in the pockets of the biotech companies. It is the overwhelming preponderance of the scientific community, including some of its leading members. It is also the UN, OECD, FAO, WHO, The US Academy of Sciences (along with the academies of many other nations), The Royal Society London, a great many medical societies, and a host of the leading scientific societies around the world who have unanimously concluded that GMO’s are as safe or safer than conventionally bred crops and pose no threat to consumers or the environment.

Minister Chance went ahead with the study by the IHER, with funding of $92,000. When questioned by the press on GM matters Chance has often stated that he has an expert “Ministerial GMO Reference Group” whose function it is to advise the government. As a member of this group I can state that the animal feeding study by Judy Carman was never referred to the reference group, but the Agriculture Department has since been directed to fund the project in Adelaide, South Australia.

In a letter to an industry representative in February 2007 it was stated that the draft protocol was sent to 15 scientific experts in eight countries for comment before it was given to the Steering Committee to consider. The 10-person steering committee is reputedly made up of experts in a range of disciplines. However, the Minister has refused to disclose the protocol, the 15 international reviewers or the names of the steering committee to his own ministerial reference group.

He invited Judy Carman to address the group on May 25, 2007 and, apart from her usual litany of complaints against FSANZ, she also refused to answer these questions. The minister supported her position, totally ignoring the fact that public funds are involved. The study will apparently be published in peer-reviewed journals and “the protocol will be revealed at this time”.

So what answers on food safety does the Chance expect from a $92,000 study? During our June 20 ministerial reference group meeting he conceded that the funding was very small and is unlikely provide the answers being sought, but may raise questions for future studies. He also stated that “maybe Judy Carman may have other sources of funding to contribute to the study”.

This is the new way of examining food safety Western Australia style!

Health concerns are a federal mandate, we have an inter-governmental agreement that is possibly being violated, and by both his statements and his actions the minister is undermining public confidence in the national regulatory system. He has sided with a very narrow constituency, he has chosen to ignore the preponderance of scientific opinion and regulatory determinations worldwide that have guided GM crops through 11 years of commercial practice, and he has funded a secret study by a known anti-GM activist under the preposterous claim that it is “independent”.

As a footnote, a freedom of information claim was filed under Section 30 of the Freedom of Information Act, 1992 by John Cudmore of Perth-based Crabtree Consulting Company. In his decision to reject the request dated June 20, 2007 the minister stated that the Information Commissioner believes the information should not be disclosed, and: “the information does not appear to be from a bona fide public interest inquiry, but rather it is being sought to pursue a narrow private interest”.

There remains a right of appeal to this ruling.

Who are the real losers in all this? It is the farmers of Western Australia who are being denied a choice of technology to use on their farms while the minister seeks excuses to continue the moratorium on GM crops. The leading farm organisations in Western Australia have all asked that the moratorium be dropped, and Victoria and South Australia are reviewing their state moratoria at this time.

Again, the question must be asked: “Who is Minister Chance serving?”