At the heart of the biosafety protocol is a concept called the “advance informed agreement.”
The agreement would see an importer assess, approve and consent to a transgenic product moving into the country.
Doug Mutch, of the Canada Grains Council, said the narrower the scope of the agreement, the more the grain trade will continue as usual.
The wider the net, the more trade flow will be hurt, he said.
Costs to prepare these agreements could range from manageable to prohibitive, he said.
Read Also
Interest in biological crop inputs continues to grow
It was only a few years ago that interest in alternative methods such as biologicals to boost a crop’s nutrient…
Stephen Yarrow, of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, said Canada is stressing the agreement only be required if the transgenic product is going to be used for “deliberate release,” such as seed for planting.
This approach would exclude global commodity trade, he said.
But if this doesn’t pass muster with other countries negotiating the agreement, Yarrow said Canada will push for an agreement to be needed only for a first shipment.
Canada is also pushing for the importer to be responsible for the agreement.
Yarrow said this approach is consistent with international trade practices. Importing countries have legal reach over importing companies, he said, and the importer knows the source and use of the product.
Canada could help developing countries create regulatory systems to handle the trade, he said.
So far, Canada has stood alone in favor of this, Yarrow said. But at negotiations in February, he found out most delegates didn’t understand what he was talking about.
Many don’t have a background in trade, he said, and simplistically believe a transaction involves only one importer and one exporter.
If exporters are responsible for the agreements, as the European Union wants, it will cost Canada dearly, he said.
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency would have to create and enforce legislation for exporters, and would pass on the cost.
