by KEN HECHTMAN

“Tewolde” in the banner pictured above isn’t some toxic new food additive. It’s Dr. Tewolde Berhan Gebre Egziabher, the Ethiopian diplomat and acknowledged leader of the international anti-GM (genetically modified) food bloc at last week’s UN Biosafety Protocol negotiations in Montreal. The Canadian government initially barred him and five other diplomats from participating in the negotiations, but then, under public and international pressure, granted Tewolde’s visa midway through the conference. The commonly held belief among activists and third-world diplomats is that Canada, as an exporter of GM food and opponent of the Biosafety Protocol, deliberately tried to decapitate the anti-GM bloc.

The banner is also a reference to the Biosafety Convention’s five-year debate on labelling of GM food. Tewolde’s group (the “Like-Minded Nations,” which includes most of Africa, Asia and Europe) wants labels on genetically modified food products to read, “It contains...” and list the specific modifications present. The biotech industry and GM-food-producing countries of the “Miami Group” want “May contain...” and a list of all possible modifications.

“I held this banner at last week’s negotiations on [GM-producers’] liability,” says Beth Burrows of the Edmonds Institute, a Canadian environmental non-governmental organization. “Tewolde wasn’t there and the banner was a true statement. This week, I held it up at the labelling negotiations. Tewolde was there and the banner was a true statement. This gives you an idea of the quality of information contained in the phrase ‘May contain...’—it may contain no information at all. If the industry puts ‘May contain...’ on every single shipment, GM or not, we have no useful information.”

Safety costs and concerns

Simon Barber, representative of the European Association for Bioindustries and leader of the industry delegation, says it’s a question of practicality and cost. “We have carloads of grain from Quebec and carloads from Saskatchewan and everywhere else, and it all goes into the same grain elevator and the same freighter. We don’t have a separate supply chain for each event [the industry term for a distinct genetic modification]. The system is designed for the most rapid movement at the lowest cost.” Barber thinks a moment. “Allowing, of course, for safety...”

To get an idea of what would be involved in isolating each genetic modification, there are 23 different varieties of GM corn on the market today. Most grain elevators don’t separate GM grain from non-GM. None separate one type of GM from another. The problem will only get worse as GM producers experiment further with corn. Soybeans, which have been modified longer, have over 1,200 GM varieties on the market.

“Legally, we have to be precise,” says Barber. “If we say the shipment contains 10 events and the customs inspectors test it and only find six, we’re in essence not being truthful. And it would cost a huge amount of money to test it ourselves.” (It can’t be all that expensive. Greenpeace was giving away free test-kits for canola cooking oil at their information table all week.)

The “It contains...” proponents are less than sympathetic to the difficulties the industry says clear labelling would impose. “That’s not our problem,” says Hira Jhamtani of the Indonesian delegation. “If they can’t comply with the regulations and can’t sell any GM food in our country, we can live with that.”

No consensus, no agreement

After five years of debate, a decision was supposed to be reached last week. Working late into Thursday night, the working group produced a draft with the “May contain...” language. At the closing plenary on Friday, Tewolde registered an objection, and under the Protocol’s rule requiring consensus, the conference couldn’t adopt the draft and will resume negotiations next year in Brazil.

In his closing address, Tewolde said, “Five years ago, in this very hall, we determined to usher in an era of transparency in the trade of LMOs (Living Modified Organisms—all genetically modified materials). In this hall, we have failed today. I believe we will fail in Brazil next year. Let us, the nations of the South, go back home and protect ourselves through national legislation, just as the industrialized nations have done.”