This week, MPs on the House of Commons agriculture committee resumed debate on a Liberal motion to impose a moratorium on approval of genetically modified alfalfa varieties.
While organic producers and anti- GMO activists insist that Roundup Ready alfalfa be kept out of the Canadian market, the Liberal motion has some in the industry scratching their heads.
They have a question for the politicians debating the issue and media covering it: impose a moratorium on what exactly?
The debate is more than five years too late.
Read Also
August rain welcome, but offered limited relief
Increased precipitation in August aids farmers prior to harvest in southern prairies of Canada.
GM alfalfa cleared Canadian regulatory hurdles in mid-2005 when the Liberals were in power. Forage Genetics International has marketing rights to the Monsanto-created seed and while research trials continue, there has been no company decision yet to try to commercialize it.
Nonetheless, regulatory approvals are in the bag. If FGI wants to commercialize it, government already has said it is safe and can be introduced to the environment.
More than five years ago, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency gave Monsanto Inc.’s RR alfalfa a thumbs up.
“Unconfined release into the environment and use as livestock feed of the alfalfa events J101 and J163 are authorized as of July 28, 2005,” said a CFIA bulletin.
The same summer, Health Canada ruled on GM alfalfa as a part of the food system.
“Health Canada’s review of the information presented in support of the food use of glyphosate-tolerant alfalfa lines containing events J101 and J163 concluded that the food use of alfalfa lines containing this event does not raise concerns related to safety,” said the department.
The GM alfalfa studied is “as safe and nutritious as current commercial alfalfa varieties.”
So what exactly are the politicians talking about?
When debate began at the Commons agriculture committee March 10, Liberal agriculture critic Wayne Easter, who was parliamentary secretary to agriculture minister Andy Mitchell when the approvals were announced, said his motion was not pre-judging the safety of GM alfalfa.
But the government should ban its commercialization until its potential economic impacts have been studied.
“This is a moratorium not a ban,” he said. “It is to let government ensure that there are no negative implications.”
But on what basis, since existing variety approval rules do not allow an economic analysis?
Conservatives on the committee chided Easter for pre-election grandstanding because his government approved “test plots” and now he is rushing to keep GM alfalfa out of the market. But in fact, Health Canada and the CFIA put no restrictions on release if proper registration was achieved.
Agriculture minister Gerry Ritz added to the confusion by implying March 10 that the committee call for a moratorium is unnecessary.
“We do have a case-by-case situation that we always put in place in Canada,” he said. “We look at a number of factors including net benefit and so forth but having said that, there has been no demand for it so we have no intention of moving forward.”
None of the politicians mentioned, or maybe were aware, that the regulatory hurdles already have been jumped.
So what are opposition MPs proposing? Should the CFIA and Health Canada go beyond their mandates to rescind decisions already taken?
