12.11.98 00:48
EU proposes farmer liability for GMO hazards
Thanks to Friends of the Earth for this story from Brussels.
It is understood that for the first time a proposed new EU
directive will
impose "strict liability" on primary agricultural
products which prove to be
unsafe, including GMOs. This means it will not be necessary to
prove
negligence for farmers to be on the receiving end of claims for
damages if
GMO products turn out to be toxic, even after they have received
Government
safety clearance.
In this context farmers are advised to speak to their insurers
before
growing GMO crops. There are indications that the insurance
industry may
not be prepared to cover this type of risk because of its
essentially
unknown nature.
Farmers growing GMO crops may therefore be exposing themselves to
unlimited
liability.
To put this in perspective the manufacturers of a food supplement
(Tryptophan) sold in the US, which utilised a genetically
modified bacteria
in its production process, have been on the receiving end of two
billion
dollars worth of claims. The genetically engineered bacteria
generated a
new toxin (whose nature is such that it would still not be picked
up under
current testing procedures) which killed 37 people and
permanently disabled
1500 more. (More information on the Tryptophan incident available
from our
web site at www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex )
How many uninsured farmers could survive that type of claim?
(Natural Law Party Wessex)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------
COMMISSIONER WARNS OF PUBLIC OPPOSITION TO GM FOODS
>
>Speaking at the opening session of the recent annual congress
of biotech
>industries "EuropaBio '98", held in Brussels on
October 27-30th, Emma
>Bonino, EU Commissioner in charge of Consumer Policy and
Health Protection,
>reminded participants that a Euro-barometer survey last year
revealed that
>more than two thirds of consumers (68 %) were worried about
the safety of
>their food. Referring to the fact that the relevant existing
EU Directive
>for product liability includes processed food but does not
cover primary
>agricultural products such as meat, fruit and vegetables, she
said that
>this loophole became only too evident with the BSE crisis,
and is also
>obvious with regard to genetically modified organisms. For
example, while
>possible risks arising from ketchup produced from genetically
modified
>tomatoes are covered because it is processed food, the
producer of the GM
>tomato itself is not liable. It was in this context, she
said, that on 1st
>October 1997 the Commission made a proposal to extend the
existing product
>liability rules to include primary agricultural products. If
the amendment
>is adopted (the amended proposal is now in its first reading
in Council and
>Parliament and may be approved next year), producers, farmers
and merchants
>will be liable if a GMO or any other primary agricultural
product which
>they have developed, planted, commercialized or processed
turns out to be
>unsafe, even if it has been approved by the authorities.
>
>Indicating her support for some medical applications of
biotechnology,
>Bonino told the audience that, on the other hand, she is
sympathetic to the
>fact that, for some products, the benefit to man may not be
so obvious. As
>far as genetically modified plants are concerned, Mrs. Bonino
said that she
>could "fully understand that in some Member States there
is no great
>enthusiasm for such plants. Recent cases give indications
that public
>authorities are more sensitive to the concern of population
regarding GMOs,
>a concern which is not always based on pure science. This
could be seen as
>a move to a more precautionary approach in this field. We
cannot hide to
>ourselves that we are facing a very difficult moment for the
progress of
>GMO products. A public acceptance, which one could have
reasonably
>expected to occur, is very far from being reached".