'GM crops fail in Africa'
2006-01-11 11:43
Johannesburg - Ten years after the first significant planting of genetically modified (GM) crops there are no apparent benefits for consumers, farmers or the environment, said a report made public on Tuesday.
However, the report is hotly disputed by the industry, which called parts of the report misleading and subjective and dismissed other parts as "lies".
The report was released by the Johannesburg-based African Centre for Biosafety and Friends of the Earth Nigeria, based in Lagos.
Monsanto, a multinational identified in the report as one of the world's largest producers of GM seed, said that contrary to the findings of the report, GM products had many documented benefits.
Report disputed
Monsanto spokesperson Andrew Bennett also dismissed the claim that despite the promises of the biotech corporations there had been no impact on hunger and poverty.
"With the exception of South Africa, no other African country has yet had the opportunity to plant transgenic (GM) crops - they are still in the process of implementing regulatory legislation. So clearly, these technologies have not had the opportunity to impact hunger and poverty," said Bennett.
The report concludes that the increase in GM crops in a limited number of countries has largely been the result of the aggressive strategies by the biotech industry, rather than the consequence of benefits derived from using GM technology.
Broken promises
Nnimmo Bassey of Friends of the Earth Nigeria said: "Contrary to the promises made by the biotech industry, the reality of the last ten years shows that the safety of GM crops cannot be ensured and that these crops are neither cheaper nor better quality. Biotech crops are not a solution to solve hunger in Africa."
But Bennett disagreed, saying the safety of GM crops had been demonstrated "by the approval of 10 academies of science worldwide, including the World Health Organisation".
Bassey added the biotech industry continues to claim, misleadingly, that GM crops play a role in solving hunger in Africa and that several western African governments had been under "substantial pressure" to introduce GM cotton.
Bennett said as a publicly traded company it abided by the laws of the countries in which it operated.
Moratorium
In the meantime at the end of 2005, South Africa adopted a moratorium on new GM crops pending a study of the Department of Trade and Industry.
"The moratorium on new GM crops in South Africa sends a clear signal of the failure of GM crops in our continent. GM cotton in South Africa did not solve our farmers' problems; it has contributed to increase their indebtedness."
Bennett says: "This is a complete fabrication. There is no moratorium on GM crops in South Africa. This is yet another case of the anti-GM lobby trying to mislead the public."
Bennett added that the number of GM cotton farmers had decreased because of drought and the low cotton price.
- SAPA