The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Taking stock of agriculture > Comments

Taking stock of agriculture : Comments

By Jan van Aken, published 5/6/2008

Australia is out of step with rest of the world. We should be diverting funding away from GE crops and industrial farming towards more sustainable farming.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
The $12m/4 yr research findings found:
- GM performance questionable
- GM introduces additional liabilities for GM and non-GM farmers
- GM patents concentrate ownership, drive up costs, undermine economic sustainability and food security, inhibit seed-saving and restrict access to products needed for independent trials.

The reason US, Canada and Australia did not ratify these comments is because their governments are major investors in GM technology with all public plant breeding institutes forming alliances with the GM companies.

Our government is part of the problem, not part of the solution on GM technology but the public is becoming more aware that the regulations surrounding GM is nothing more than a public relations exercise and the promotions on GM is nothing more than hype.
Posted by Non-GM farmer, Thursday, 5 June 2008 1:53:31 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Every survey on genetically engineered food shows the vast majority of Australians do not want GE food and crops. Then why has the Australian government backed their introduction and even questioned the research findings of the United Nations' International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development which show that GE does not have a place in the future of sustainable agriculture and in solving the world's food problems?
Posted by Kesha, Thursday, 5 June 2008 2:03:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
That the IAASTD report will impact UN and World Bank projects around the world will be welcome to many Australians who are dismayed by the Australian Government's abandonment of election promises regarding the adoption of GE food crops. We can only hope that it carries enough clout to shake some sense into our Government.
We have a Minister for Agriculture who has no background in agriculture, and a Geneticist as the Chief Scientist advising the Australian Government. It is no wonder Australia is heading in the wrong direction in agriculture.
Posted by lynbee, Thursday, 5 June 2008 2:24:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Luckily the State governments (except NSW and Victoria whose state governments have also very heavily invested in GM technology) have taken an alternative path to Federal.
The Federal government has authority over health and environment. GM canola was claimed to be "rigorously tested and proven to be safe" but the GM canola oil was not tested at all and the remaining meal is not regulated because its stock feed. The GM company submits the data they want and by submitting stock feed data they avoid any regulation and the government does not ask for more.
GM canola oil is not labelled and because the government "accepted" contamination in our non-GM produce (no, we don't accept that)we are unable to provide canola for use in a labelled "GM-free" product as no contamination is accepted.
Considering the adverse health testing that has been found in the little testing that was done, why would consumers want to take the risk?
One of the findings of this committee was that the patented seed was not available for independent testing. I agree it should be.
What are GM investors so frightened of?
Posted by Non-GM farmer, Thursday, 5 June 2008 3:04:13 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I find it very strange that while the Rudd government's platform was all for protecting the environment, no sooner do they get into office than they reverse themselves on the issue of genetically modified foods. As a consumer and a world traveler, I find it very odd that when so many foreign organisms, both flora and fauna, are banned from entering the country, GM organisms which are completely new to the planet are willy nilly allowed in, as if they were manna sent down by God.
Posted by Seraph, Thursday, 5 June 2008 3:35:24 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As a retired cockie going on 88, but still very interested in the great grandkids running the growing family business, have been trying to get them interested in growing Indian mustard, formerly a worrying weed in wheat crops which had been introduced from India in the non-bulk days the seeds illegally stuck in the steel strapped bales which contained the three bushell sacks called wheat bags.

As Indian mustard is actually an original parent of canola and will virtually survive on just a smell of moisture, one wonders why it has not been made use of to grow for diesel fuel?

As I can't get any sense out of anyone over here in the West, was wondering if any of our group has ever heard of Indan mustard?

Doesn't seem to be anyone old enough around to remember?

Cheers, BB, WA.
Posted by bushbred, Thursday, 5 June 2008 4:42:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy