The "End Of Consumer Choice" Over GE
International Food-Agency Program Signals The "End Of Consumer Choice". Government Weakness Risks Loss Of National Sovereignty And Backdown On Promise To Label GE Food.
The Government's promise to allow consumer choice by requiring labelling of GM food may be meaningless if plans before the global food authority go ahead. Codex Alimentarius, the bureaucracy with control of world food standards is asking for global public participation in its work, but its proposals may already spell doom for basic consumer rights.
Having for years seemingly ignored the consumer voice Codex has now asked for public submissions on its plans by May 13th. Ironically this deadline is the anniversary date of supermarket protests in New Zealand, in which stores were raided by consumers demanding GE labelling to allow consumers to choose. Hundreds took part and three people were arrested .
"Our food standards are fast being eroded and there will
be bigger protests if it continues" said Jon Carapiet a
consumer advocate for GE-Free NZ. "The labelling of GE
products will become voluntary if those countries like the
US, get their way in Codex
negotiations, yet still no
long term testing of GE foods has taken place".
Established by the FAO and WHO in 1962, so far only governments have had a say in its running. Multinational giants, given the status of countries, have also been allowed huge input into food standard rulings and pressured small nations to support their profiteering demands.
"Public involvement is essential to prevent this
independent review being highjacked by
multinationals."
said Susie Lees from GE-Free NZ , 'but there are fears the
public will be reluctant to submit comments, having been
previously ignored by bodies like ANZFA and in the Royal
Commission' on GM.'
" World standards for labelling of
food and for food safety often over-ride national ones
because the WTO uses Codex standards in trade
negotiations",said Susie.
Conflicts between consumer protection and world trade are resulting as agricultural practices descend to unsafe levels. With new concerns about GE food continuing to be raised around the world and staple crops becoming contaminated by GE.
Current Codex plans being considered relate to rules on traceability, country of origin labelling, and organic standards all being worked through apparently to make it easier to introduce GE crops.
" We are looking at a scenario where there is no longer any right to choose. This is the end of traditional consumer-marketing ; when people are forced to accept contamination of all food by GE constructs", said Mr Carapiet.
" The Mexican government announced at the
Hague on April 18th that this has already happened with
Maize. We want renewed promises from the government that
they
will not allow their own weakness and trade-agenda
to result in the ultimate sacrifice of New Zealander's basic
rights".
Submissions can be made up to May 13th to
the WHO Department of Budget and Management Reform, 1211
Geneva 27, Switzerland; fax: +41 22 791 4807;
email:
[codexreview@who.int. ] More information at
http://www.who.int/fsf,
ENDS
Media contact Jon - 09
815 3370
Susie - 03 546 7966
Background
info:-
9 APRIL 2002--INDEPENDENT EVALUATION OF THE
CODEX ALIMENTARIUS AND OTHER
FAO-WHO WORK
ON FOOD
STANDARDS
INFORMATION NOTE AND INFORMAL PUBLIC CALL
FOR COMMENTS
The Codex Alimentarius Commission was
established by FAO and WHO in 1962
to implement the Joint
FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. The
Programme's
importance has gradually shifted from
providing a basis for national
standards to providing the
point of reference in standards, guidelines
and codes of
practice for international trade.
FAO and WHO have now
called for an in-depth independent evaluation of
the work
of the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme, including
the
Codex Alimentarius Commission, in order to meet more
effectively the
needs of the world's people and improve
the systems to protect and
promote the global food supply
for both developing and developed
countries. The terms
of reference for the evaluation can be found on
WHO's web
site at: http://www.who.int/fsf, together with other
relevant
background information.
This evaluation,
launched in March 2002 and due to be completed in
early
2003, will examine the respective requirements of
producers, industry,
traders, consumers and regulators
and provide recommendations and
considerations for the
future on the relevance of standards or
alternative
approaches in meeting the overall objectives in
consumer
protection (in particular for health risks) and
in ensuring fair
practices for food trade, including the
needs of both developed and
developing countries.
The
evaluation will be carried out by an independent Evaluation
Team and
an Expert Panel. The two groups will work
closely together and produce
reports by November this
year, following the widest possible
consultation with
member countries of FAO and WHO and other
stakeholders.
In addition to a formal questionnaire on
key issues to Member States and
stakeholders through
official channels (which will be distributed in
May
2002), the consultation process will involve
different vehicles,
including country visits, in-depth
interviews, literature reviews,
content analysis,
etc.
One element of this process is to invite informal
comments from the
global public and all potentially
interested parties, in an attempt to
include the broadest
possible range of relevant opinions and issues.
All
comments thus received will be forwarded to the
Evaluation Team and
Expert Panel for their consideration
as part of responses obtained
through the various
methods. All information will be held confidentially
and
no individual names will be mentioned in any
reports.
Interested stakeholders and the public are
invited to send their
comments by 13 May 2002 to the WHO
Department of Budget and Management
Reform, 1211 Geneva
27, Switzerland; fax: +41 22 791 4807;
email:
[codexreview@who.int. ]
Issues for comment
could include following aspects:
(1) The relevance and
adequacy of Codex and other food standards as a
basis for
consumer health protection, trade and economic
development,
including
. the relevance and adequacy of
standards as instruments for preventing
foodborne
diseases and other health risks, for food safety
risk
management and consumer protection, and for trade
and economic
development and production practice;
.
the expectations as to standards in imports and exports and
for
domestic trade, particularly as regards the validity
and acceptability
of standards;
(2) The adequacy of
governance structures and decision-making processes
in
Codex and other food standard work, including
. the
expectation as to the institutional mechanisms for
standard
setting, including the structure and procedures
of the Codex
Alimentarius Commission and its subsidiary
bodies;
. the technical and administrative support given
to the work of the
Commission by FAO and WHO, including
secretariat and expert committees,
possibilities and
limitations for participation in the decision
making
processes, and direct and indirect costs and ways
of covering them;
(3) The efficiency and transparency of
the Codex process, including the
independence of Codex
bodies and of scientific advice given to Codex
and
avoidance of conflict of interest;
(4)
Opportunities to participate in the Codex process,
including
. the particular interests of developing
countries as regards
participation in the standards
setting process and assistance to them in
implementing
standards;
. the expectation of producers, industry and
civil society and their
likely impact on international
standards;
. mobilization of adequate support for
developing country capacity
building and their
participation in the standard setting processes; and
(5)
Implications for future international systems of food safety
and
food standards developments relative to public
health, food trade and
economic development in a broad
sense, including
. advantages of potentially quite
different approaches to those at
present in place for
consumer protection (especially for health) and
economic
development through clarity in international and domestic
trade
as well as for standard setting at international
and domestic levels;
. the implications for developing
countries, if food standards setting
for international
trade were allowed to become the preserve of
the
developed countries and main trading nations.