BY RAYYAR FARHAT
SYDNEY — Over the objections of many farmers present and despite the urging of environmental activists, the NSW Farmers Association voted at its July 18 annual general meeting to support the release of genetically engineered crops.
The meeting adopted a proposal from the association's appointed biotechnology task force, bypassing attempts by some regional farmers' committees to move for either an outright ban on GE products or at least a moratorium on the commercial release of GE crops. Many farmers stood up and objected to GE's commercialisation, given the risks associated with it and the lack of safety testing.
Biotechnology firms had made a concerted attempt to convince farmers of the benefits of GE crops at a forum hosted by Graincorp the previous night. Graincorp and Vicgrain, the country's principal grain handlers, have formed a joint venture, Nugrain, which is collaborating with biotech giant Monsanto to genetically engineer broadacre crops.
Graincorp packed the panel with advocates of GE technology from both the private sector and government, including seed supplier Hugh Roberts, one of three members of association's biotechnology task force, Liz Flynn of the Interim Office of the Gene Technology Regulator, and Dr TJ Higgins of the CSIRO. Only one GE opponent, Scott Kinnear, the director of the Organic Federation of Australia, was invited to speak.
While eulogising the potential benefits of genetic engineering, Higgins admitted that it is undeniably associated with risks.
Problems are not limited to genetic pollution, through cross-pollination and encouraging resistance in the pests and weeds, he said. According to Higgins, the use of viruses to carry DNA into a foreign genome, and the use of antibiotic-resistant marker genes which let a genetic engineer identify successful gene integration in foreign hosts, will lead to the emergence of stealth viruses and antibiotic-resistant micro-organisms never before known.
Roberts, in contrast, took a hard line in favour of biotechnology, maintaining that there was no evidence of shrinkage in the GE market as consumers learnt more about it and claiming that Australia would be left behind if it did not embrace the technology.
Roberts claimed there was no substantive public opposition to GE foods; "GE hysteria" was something beaten up by a few environmental groups, he said. Ignoring polls which have consistently shown up to 90% of Australians want GE labelling, he said that consumers would not care if they consumed GE food and that labelling was superfluous.
Roberts' attitude, and the use of security guards against a group of protesters, only angered farmers. At the association's AGM, one farmer from Peak Hill defended the opponents of the GE, saying "This wasn't rent a crowd, many of them were women, they could have been our wives, motivated by their concern for the well-being of fellow Australians. They have taken time off their jobs, taken time away from their families to be here ... They are telling us they do not want genetically engineered foods. Yet we are too deaf to hear. We ignore them at our own peril."
The meeting's chairpersons, however, insisted that farmers should treat all motions against the commercialisation of GE crops as tantamount to ending research and regressing technologically. Objections were shouted down.
But while farmers are being bullied, out of fear of being left behind, they are far from convinced of GE's virtues.