Executive Secretary Darrin Qualman represented the NFU at a September 1 Ottawa meeting on genetic engineering. Recent events in Europe and growing Canadian concern over genetically-engineered (GE) foods sparked the meeting. It was organized by the Council of Canadians and attended by Greenpeace, Canadian Organic Growers, Canadian Health Coalition, the Sierra Club, Oxfam, RAFI, the Centre for Science in the public interest, and representatives from other organizations.

Consumer resistance in the United Kingdom forced major food retailers such as Marks & Spencer and Sainsbury to stop stocking GE foods. Wider European resistance has lead to a European Union (EU) ban on the approval of new GE foods and has spilled over to fuel continued opposition to hormone-injected beef.

European consumers moved swiftly and decisively to reject GE foods. Canadian farmers can no longer export canola to EU markets: soybean exports are also affected. Japan may soon require labeling for GE foods. This would reduce or eliminate Canadian exports of canola and soybeans to Japan: one of the world's largest markets. Markets around the world for beans, canola, corn, potatoes, and other crops are threatened.

Consumers and farmers alike are questioning the benefits of GE foods and demanding answers regarding the risks. The Canadian provincial and federal governments are ignoring their responsibilities to test and regulate GE foods. New legislation such as the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and the Canadian Food Safety and Inspection Act remove the government's responsibility (and, in many cases, ability) to test GE foods. The governments argue that these products are "substantially equivalent" to existing foods and, thus, require no testing. The bottom line is that this is untested food and untested technology. Consumers and farmers alike are right to be cautious.

The Canadian government chooses to promote (rather than test and regulate) GE food. As a result, Canadian consumers do not have access to clear, balanced information on the risks and benefits of GE foods. Many groups at the Ottawa meeting plan to launch campaigns this fall that will fill the information vacuum created by the government and biotech corporations. These groups want to spur the same kind of debate in Canada that has occurred in the U.K. and EU.

Farmers, for their part, should take a careful, long-term look at the real potential for GE seeds to deliver on promises of increased profitability. Over the last five decades, farmers have embraced a variety of new technologies: chemical fertilizers, pesticides, new seeding systems, computers, and genetically-engineered seeds. For this commendable willingness to adapt, farmers have been rewarded with the lowest net farm incomes since the 1930s. GE seeds solve some weed and pest problems, but they also increase the cost of seeds, increase corporate control of family farms, and lock farmers into an increasingly industrial mode of production. Nitrogen fertilizers and 2-4-D have not made our farms profitable, will Monsanto's seeds?

Almost all Canadians want safe, nutritious foods produced on family-owned farms in an environmentally-sustainable way. We should carefully question whether genetic engineering is the best way to reach these goals.

Back to Issue Index

Back to Union Farmer Index

Back to NFU Home Page