Sunday 27 May 2012
Headlines
Did you find this story interesting? (0) (0)
10/10/2003
NFU want no compensation for non-GM farmers with contaminated crops
The Soil Association today attacked the National Farmers' Union's position that non-GM farmers should have no financial protection if GM crops are grown in the UK. The NFU are keen that GM farmers do not have to pay in full for any damage they cause, saying that it would "be disproportionate to allow the entire responsibility for implementing management measures for coexistence [to] fall on the grower of a GM crop". In fact, they seem happy for the entire responsibility to fall on non-GM and organic farmers - but they don't come clean and say so. The NFU published their Policy Statement on the coexistence of GM crops with conventional and organic production on 7 October.
Patrick Holden, Soil Association Director, said "This weasel worded statement from the NFU tells us what they don't want: GM farmers to be responsible for the economic losses they might cause their non-GM and organic neighbours. What the NFU don't have the guts to say is what they do want - which is to leave non-GM farmers paying for the damage that they will suffer if GM crops are ever grown in the UK".
The NFU paper discusses options to protect non-GM growers in the event of contamination by GM. The NFU opposes the use of the courts by non-GM growers, rightly saying that this would be "most unsatisfactory and uncertain", that legal action would be "costly", and that "it is unclear if it could be successful".
The NFU says compensation schemes , whether funded by the taxpayer or industry, would be problematic, and could be highly bureaucratic. They " fundamentally oppose a levy" and appear to favour insurance - which means the cost (of insurance premiums) would fall on non-GM farmers and organic farmers.
But they do recognise what is already widely known, namely that "most insurance companies would be reluctant to offer insurance in the early stages of introduction of GM crops due to the uncertainties in assessing the risk". In fact, no insurance companies are prepared to provide insurance against the risk of GM contamination. The only option left would be what the NFU describes as doing "nothing and let the non-GM grower bear any commercial loss".
Patrick Holden added "The NFU's irresponsible position threatens the future of the vast majority of conventional farmers who do not want to grow GM crops. It could also spell financial ruin for many organic farmers. The Soil Association's position is clear: responsibility for any financial losses suffered by non-GM farmers, organic and conventional, should be met by the GM chemical companies who stand to profit from GM crops".
Patrick Holden, Soil Association Director, said "This weasel worded statement from the NFU tells us what they don't want: GM farmers to be responsible for the economic losses they might cause their non-GM and organic neighbours. What the NFU don't have the guts to say is what they do want - which is to leave non-GM farmers paying for the damage that they will suffer if GM crops are ever grown in the UK".
The NFU paper discusses options to protect non-GM growers in the event of contamination by GM. The NFU opposes the use of the courts by non-GM growers, rightly saying that this would be "most unsatisfactory and uncertain", that legal action would be "costly", and that "it is unclear if it could be successful".
The NFU says compensation schemes , whether funded by the taxpayer or industry, would be problematic, and could be highly bureaucratic. They " fundamentally oppose a levy" and appear to favour insurance - which means the cost (of insurance premiums) would fall on non-GM farmers and organic farmers.
But they do recognise what is already widely known, namely that "most insurance companies would be reluctant to offer insurance in the early stages of introduction of GM crops due to the uncertainties in assessing the risk". In fact, no insurance companies are prepared to provide insurance against the risk of GM contamination. The only option left would be what the NFU describes as doing "nothing and let the non-GM grower bear any commercial loss".
Patrick Holden added "The NFU's irresponsible position threatens the future of the vast majority of conventional farmers who do not want to grow GM crops. It could also spell financial ruin for many organic farmers. The Soil Association's position is clear: responsibility for any financial losses suffered by non-GM farmers, organic and conventional, should be met by the GM chemical companies who stand to profit from GM crops".
No Comments
Nobody has posted any comments on this story.
|
Farming items for Sale
|
Massey Ferguson 5445 - Tiverton(GBP 22200)
Massey Ferguson 5470 - Lancaster(GBP 28100)
MF 6180 1995 4360 hrs 40kph excellent in every - Craven Arms(GBP 15750)
John Deere 5720 - Chippenham
(Price on Application)
(Price on Application)
Challenger MT755 - Burwell
(Price on Application)
(Price on Application)
Related News
New research published on cross-pollination between GM and Non-GM crops - 25 Oct 2005The results of a Defra-funded study on gene flow (cross-pollination) between GM and non-GM oilseed rape were published in the October edition of the s...
GM outcrosses six times more than non-GM wheat - 04 May 2012Recent research has found that varieties of GM wheat are outcrossing to other plants at a rate six times higher than conventional varieties. The fi...
NFU Report: NFU outlines non-agricultural use impact on SPS - 10 Sep 2008A letter has gone to the European Commission stating the NFU"e;s position in relation to non-agricultural use and its impact on SPS. The regulatio...
Report highlights progress on non food crops strategy - 17 Nov 2006Significant progress in the way the UK produces and uses bioenergy and renewable materials is highlighted in a report, published today by Defra and DT...
Arable farmers 'upbeat about GM crops' - 25 Feb 2008UK arable farmers are generally supportive of GM technology, seeing it as a way of meeting the conflicting demands for cheap food produced in an envir...
NFU Cymru welcomes non introduction of national envelope - 16 Jun 2009NFU Cymru has welcomed today’s announcement by the Rural Affairs Minister that the Welsh Assembly Government will not be introducing a National ...
NFU wants ombudsman to guarantee fairness in the supply chain - 25 Nov 2007The NFU is calling for an independent ombudsman to oversee a significantly improved Supermarket Code of Practice to ensure the supply chain is fair, t...
NFU wants fair deal from peat policy changes - 18 Dec 2010UK growers should not be put at a competitive disadvantage by plans to phase out the use of peat in horticulture, the NFU has warned. The NFU will ...
India needs to create more non-agriculture jobs for farmers - 13 Nov 2008With the share of the farm sector in the GDP declining, India should try to provide more non-agricultural jobs to create more opportunities for the su...
Soil Association backs Meacher's stance on GM crops - 23 Jun 2003The Soil Association has backed former environment minister Michael Meacher's outspoken criticism of the government's position GM food, in yes...
