Talks with chemical critics ‘top priority’

Reading Time: 2 minutes

Published: October 4, 2001

NIAGARA FALLS, Ont. – Rick Smith, president of Dow AgroSciences and chair of the Crop Protection Institute of Canada, wrapped up a recent industry meeting by promising to work with chemical critics.

But his olive branch had a sharp, aggressive edge, since he promptly denounced the critics as unrealistic, anti-science opponents of progress.

“Establishing a dialogue with opponents of change, those who would ban our technologies and bring scientific advancements to a halt, is at the top of our priority list in the year ahead,” he said Sept. 18.

Read Also

Agriculture ministers have agreed to work on improving AgriStability to help with trade challenges Canadian farmers are currently facing, particularly from China and the United States. Photo: Robin Booker

Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes

federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million

To those supporting a growing movement to ban use of urban lawn chemicals and other pesticide use in cities, Smith said “the fear of accepting any risk in life is challenging our ability to deliver the benefits of both chemical crop protection products and biotechnology to consumers and producers alike.”

He said those who insist any level of risk from pesticides and biotechnology is unacceptable “overlook our proud history of innovation and forget the fact that without accepting risk, we wouldn’t have the incredible quality of life we have today.”

Smith’s comments came after a two-day conference that featured the repeated message from sympathetic critics and communications experts that the industry communications style is wrong. It is too dry, too defensive, too negative.

Campaigners against genetic modification talk about “frankenfoods,” dress up as allegedly endangered Monarch butterflies and produce material that plays on public fears of unlabelled new products with untested long-term effects.

The industry responds with scientific facts, accusations that opponents are reactionary, anti-progress liars and advertisements featuring farmers extolling the virtues of GM varieties.

“This does not resonate with the public,” Simon Fraser University professor Mark Winston told the annual meeting.

Smith said the goal of the industry will be to connect with consumers to educate them about the benefits of pesticides and biotechnology to the food producing sector, and about the regulatory safeguards to ensure products approved for sale are safe.

The industry will stress its commitment to environmental stewardship, promoting safety and responsible use of chemicals and helping food producers survive.

Institute president Lorne Hepworth said the goal of the industry, and central to its public relations message, is that scientific advances will allow the sector to “leave a smaller, eco-friendly footprint.”

As part of the campaign, the lobby will change its name from Crop Protection Institute to CropLife Canada.

explore

Stories from our other publications