|
|
|
|
|
agriculture |
|
|
|
|
agriculture
Among the clearances Union Minister Veerappa Moily granted after he replaced Jayanthi Natarajan in the Environment Ministry was to a March 13 decision of the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC), the regulatory body for genetically modified (GM) crops in the country. This was an approval for institutions and seed companies to conduct field trials for 13 transgenic crops — rice, wheat, maize, mustard, potato, brinjal, tomato, groundnut, sorghum, castor and cotton — and their varieties, subject to approval by the GEAC and state governments. Refusing to sign the file, Jayanthi had earlier written to the PMO saying it was not feasible as the issue was pending in the Supreme Court. But Moily’s contention was that since the GEAC was a statutory body it was not under any embargo from the apex court. Moily said: “The earlier minister [who is also a lawyer] thought it [GEAC approval] was in conflict with the pending cases in the SC. But there were no such conflict. You cannot keep a decision taken by a statutory body pending.” His next comment was even more telling. “The file was pending in the minister’s chamber for one year. We have no business to reject ongoing research and development,” he said. The signal was clear — the government was conducive to GM vegetables and food grains, irrespective of the anti-GM lobby’s red flag on health and environmental issues. Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar had always batted in its favour and recently Prime Minister Manmohan Singh also cautioned against succumbing “to unscientific prejudices against Bt crops”. Long road ahead Even as the GEAC prepares to take forward Moily’s mandate, most likely on March 21, it is also clear that the last word has not yet been said on the contentious issue. Experts visualise a long and rough road ahead before GM food on Indian tables becomes a reality. A key point here is “clearance by the state government”. A no-objection certificate (NoC) will have to be procured from states where the trials are to be conducted. States like Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, West Bengal, Rajasthan, Odisha, Karnataka and Kerala, which have opposed field trials in the past, are unlikely to change their stance. The Rajasthan Government had ordered the burning of a standing GM crop after allowing field trials in 2012. Of course, then it was Congress ruled and now it is under the BJP. States like Punjab and Maharashtra could be conducive, but for an approval trials need to be carried out as per set procedures, which also include the requirement that they be done in a certain number of eco-zones. Seed companies have been demanding a national-level NoC, which does not appear possible, at least for now. Besides, the matter is still pending in the Supreme Court. Its six-member Technical Experts Committee (TEC) had suggested an indefinite moratorium on field trials till a proper regulatory mechanism was in place. Environment and Agriculture ministries will be filing an affidavit, pleading for field trials. GM food is a complex issue, with many shades of grey. Along with green concerns is also the fact that agriculture in India, where population is growing by leaps and bounds, is heavily dependent on the vagaries of monsoon. Therefore, new innovations and safe technologies in agriculture are required. GM in food chain The fact that trials of GM food crops are yet to begin may give the impression that genetically modified foods are currently not being consumed in India. That is a myth. Technically India does not allow GM food crops, yet they are already part of the food chain through non-food GM crops such as Bt cotton. Cottonseed oil is widely used in homes and commercially by bakeries and other snack food manufacturers. Almost 90 per cent of the cotton cultivated in India is transgenic. This means it is also part of the feed (cottonseed is an ingredient) for the cattle that give us milk. Also, India thus far has no mechanism for labelling of GM food. India imports large quantities of oil from countries like Brazil and Argentina, which grow GM soya and corn. With markets loaded with imported corn chips and snacks, genetically modified ingredients in our food is a reality. Consider what a parliamentary panel noted: “The government is yet to take a final call on labelling. There is a complete lack of post-market surveillance, as has been pointed out in one particular example of lakhs of tonnes of Bt cottonseed oil having gone into the food chain during the last 10 years without anybody in the government being aware or concerned about it”. Support for GM The National Academy of Agricultural Scientists (NAAS), comprising experts from the Indian Council of Agriculture Research (ICAR), Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI) and other government institutions, recently passed a resolution following a roundtable under the chairmanship of Prof MS Swaminathan on “GM Crops for Nutritional Security”. It said: “To achieve a zero hunger challenge of the United Nations by 2025, we must double the small farm productivity. Such an increase will be possible only through the intelligent and intensive application of new technologies such as biotechnology”. The resolution also carried guidelines but the basic the stress was on the potential of GM crop technology in addressing problems of low farm productivity, malnutrition and hunger. Approving India’s genetic engineering regulatory system, it stated: “The existing three-tier system of IBSC (Institutional Bio-Safety Committee), RCGM (Regional Committee on Genetic Manipulation) and the GEAC has done a good job and should be strengthened with adequate infrastructure and technical support to continue with the confined field trials so that the research progress is not halted. Scientists should communicate with the public and policy makers about the safety and benefits of GM crop products and remove the undue fears and apprehensions about GM crop adoption”. Pitching for the GEAC to function as a statutory body and a final authority, the NAAS said NoC from states should not be required as products will not get to farmers or consumers. “Agriculture is a state subject and it is important that the state agricultural universities and state departments of agriculture are involved in the implementation of the field trials but without losing time,” the scientists’ body headed by ICAR director general S Ayyappan said. The detractors Activists refer to the Prime Minister’s “promotional statement” at the Indian Science Congress in Jammu to prove allegations of the government being “sold out to MNCs”. “The Manmohan Singh government is facilitating profiteering by MNCs without addressing the concerns about bio-safety, monopoly control over seeds and having a fool-proof regulatory mechanism in place,” says Rajesh Krishnan of the Coalition for GM-Free India. The anti-GM lobby has already touched base with different parties, including the main opposition BJP. If indications from BJP manifesto committee chief Murli Manohar Joshi are a hint, then the party may not favour GM crops if it comes to power. For the All-India Kisan Sabha, a farmers’ body of the CPI, “monopoly of the MNCs like Monsanto over the seeds is a major concern”. “Seeds are no longer in the public domain as they are now the intellectual property of these MNCs. The government has made no efforts to generate self-reliance in seeds by combining ingenuity of farmers and the technical knowhow of scientists. Instead it has only sold out Indian agriculture to big agri-businesses, making IARI and other agricultural research bodies collaborate with global MNCs as virtual junior partners,” it says. Neha Saigal of Greenpeace alleges that “Moily was brought in during the last innings of the UPA 2 to give express approvals for risky experiments on GM crops. Only four countries cultivate 91 per cent of the GM crops globally, and only 4 per cent of the global agricultural land is cultivated with GM crops.” Umendra Dutt of the Punjab-based Kheti Virasat Mission says: “Experience with the only GM crop, Bt cotton, has shown that GM crops benefit multinational seed companies and no one else. Veerappa Moily by permitting field trials seems to be doing a great favour to these companies who are out there to take control of our seeds and thereby our farming.” Activists say that the TEC report had also pointed to inherent risks associated with GM crops and “absolute failure of the Indian regulatory system”. “There is a growing body of scientific evidence on adverse impacts of GM crops on human health, environment and farm livelihoods. Recent experiences of Monsanto’s GM rice and GM wheat from field trials contaminating the grain supply chain in the USA is a case in point,” they say. Where GM stands today
 |
|
‘Do long-term bio-safety assessment indoors’
Why do you think Veerappa Moily reversed Jayanthi Natarajan’s decision? There is no credible reason other than vested interests. How else will one explain a reversal in position which was based on the argument in the TEC’s final report advising against open field trials and when the court is slated to hear this report on April 2014? Even the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture has said no to field trials. The GEAC meeting on March 21 is likely to give the go-ahead to field trials. Given that the GEAC is not ready to listen to science and society, we will continue to urge the state governments not to give NOC for field trials. Nine states have refused in the past and we hope others will also do that. We have also asked political parties to take a position against GM crops in their manifestos. We hope the new government would be on the side of science and society and stop this mindless promotion of GM crops. Field trials and R&D are important to explore new options. And for the growing population don’t we need more productive options? These are two entirely different questions. To ensure food security for our country are GM crops the only way forward and would stopping field trials of GM crops stop R&D in agricultural science and technology? GM crops have no role to play in ensuring food security. It is clear from government statistics that there is no dearth of availability of food grains in the country. We have been achieving record production year after year but the lack of political will in ensuring food security has more than 50 per cent of our population malnourished. This cannot be changed by techno-fixes like GM crops. Experiences from across the world show field trials can lead to contamination of seed and food supply chains. If at all one wants to bring in such risky technology, it should be done only after all long-term bio-safety assessments have been done inside glasshouses or greenhouses, and that is possible. Field trials are mostly for assessing agronomic performances and that should be done only after safety assessments are done indoors. GM
crops are already a part of our food chain. Almost 90 per cent of the
cotton in India is Bt. It is used for animal feed and producing
cottonseed oil. India also imports oil from countries that grow GM
crops. The tragedy is that there are tremendous efforts from the developers and promoters of this technology to contaminate our food and seed with all kinds of GM crops. ‘Contaminate first and then approve’ is the tactic that the GM seed industry has been applying across the world. Bt cotton in India was also a classic example. The response to that shouldn't be to let all kinds of GM crops flood our farms and push them down our throats, but to stop them and hold accountable the people responsible for the crime of contamination without our permission or even knowledge. While you accuse the government of towing the MNCs’ line the counter charge is that they are being anti-development and anti-national. In just 10 years Monsanto, world's largest seed giant, has taken over the entire cotton seed market in our country through its proprietary Bt cotton. Giving away seed sovereignty, especially for an agrarian country like India, is akin to giving away our national sovereignty. Also it is nothing but propaganda to say that those who oppose just one risky technology in agriculture are anti-development or anti-national. In fact those who promote it and thereby put our health, environment and livelihoods under threat are the ones who are anti-national. Many countries have gone completely GM. There is absolutely no country in the world which has gone 100 per cent GM. Even now less that 4 per cent of the total global cultivated area is under GM crops. As much as 90 per cent of the GM area is in four countries — US, Canada, Brazil and Argentina. Only four GM crops are majorly cultivated in these countries — corn,
soya, cotton and canola.
|
|
|
WHY Genetically Modified crops are REQUIRED
|
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
The Tribune spoke to Rajesh Krishnan, Coalition for GM-Free India, to get the views of the anti-GM food lobby. Excerpts:
The National Academy of Agricultural Scientists, comprising experts from Indian government institutions, recently passed a resolution in favour of genetically modified crops. It made the following points among the reasons: