Caution on transgenic foods” “

The debate on genetically modified organisms (GMO) occupied a lot of space at the recent FAO summit and at the parallel Forum of the non government organizations (NGO) on food sovereignty which was held in Rome from 10 to 13 June. The summit’s final document affirmed a moderate opening to GMOs, as requested by some countries, in particular the USA, in contrast with the initial European position. What emerged at the Forum of the NGOs – attended by over 600 delegates from 92 countries to discuss the right to food and access to resources, to water and land – was, among other things, the request for a new moratorium on the use of GMOs, the right to food sovereignty to sell national products on the domestic market of one’s own country, and respect for human rights. We sounded out some views on the matter. Genetically modified organisms. What’s Europe’s stance? “Europe is represented in the non governmental organizations, it’s present at the FAO summit”, points out Sergio Marelli, president of the Italian organizing Committee of the Forum of the NGOs, “but it continues to have a somewhat wobbly stance on the issue, at times tending to align itself with the position of the USA, at times in conflict with it (both on GMOs and on agricultural issues), at times with extremely forward-looking and interesting positions of its own”. Marelli hopes that the European Union “may propose and defend its position on GMOs and persuade its own member states to back it, so that at the end of this year, when the period of moratorium ends, there will be a renewal. The Italian government too has recognized the risks of these technologies. We think that there is an enlarged consensus on the fact that the problem of hunger is not solved by going down this road: all we do is increase the risks for human health, the natural environment and the biodiversity of the planet. The only justification is the profit of the big multinationals. Why should people continue to insist on this approach?” Defending biological agriculture. “Europe has an important task in resolving the problems of hunger in the world”. Convinced of this is Anamarija Slabe, from Slovenia, member of the Institute of Sustainable Development: “Public opinion is coming to the realization of the need to seek alternative systems to industrial agriculture because it no longer has any trust in generically modified products. The support of the European Union is very important for the spread of biological agriculture, which ought to be of interest not only to consumers but also to international trade”. In his view, it’s a matter of understanding “what Europe really wants”: “Ecology or the transgenic? Both things are impossible. The consumer seeks biological products, but they are still too expensive for many families. What’s needed is a system that encourages producers throughout the world to adopt ecological techniques in agriculture and help consumers with clear labelling and low prices”. In Africa words aren’t enough. “In words Europe says she wants to help us, but the reality is very different”. That’s the comment of the Senegalese Ndiogou Fall, president of Roppa, the network of peasant organizations of West Africa, which represents 35 million people in ten African countries . “Europe is protectionist with its own products, and of course we cannot enter into competition with her, while our markets are being swamped with European and American products that cost less. We agree on the need for investments in our countries and the creation of services, on condition that Europe, at the same time, helps us to develop our agriculture so that we may succeed in selling our own products on our own domestic markets”. Patrizia Caiffa