[pf] Fw.re: negative-labelling of GM-free food is threatened

At 11:27 2/5/2001 +1200, Siegfried Kirchmair <.-.-.@cactus-soft.co.nz>
wrote to GreenViews-NZ, with Subject: GE- labelling :-
>
>Hi,
>... it seems the pro-ge lobby has good strategies to succeed even if
nobody on this planet likes the ge food crap....
>


SOUTH AFRICA and AUSTRALIA are calling for severe curbs on GM-Free and
non-GM labels at the meeting of the WTO's CODEX Committee on:
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1st - 4th May.

 Below is the full text of their proposal. Genetic Food Alert UK (GFA)
believe that a threefold strategy is being used by the biotech industry and
its allies to break the global consumer boycott of GM foods by abolishing
food labeling.
 This strategy involves:
 1. Maximising the global spread of GM pollution through the deliberate
contamination of seed supplies, the non-segregation of raw materials for
the food industry and the imposition of uncontained 'field trials' of GM
crops on regions wishing to be GM-Free. Whilst the GM contamination of food
is still principally a US problem, the contamination of seeds from the US
and Canada, together with the 'trialling' of GM crops in hundreds of
locations in many countries threatens to globalise the problem.

 2. Undermining public support for negative GM labeling by finding and
giving high-level publicity to any food products labeled as 'non-GM' or
'GM-Free' that they have succeeded in contaminating - and then calling for
national and international bans on such labels. Major ingredient suppliers
linked to the biotech industry currently tell manufacturers that such
claims are 'impossible' to justify, whilst independent producers that have
exercised due diligence in avoiding contamination are happy to make such
claims.

 3. Opposing statutory GM labeling by ensuring that there is so much
contamination that everything has to be labeled as GM, by demanding that
contamination thresholds are increased every time the background
contamination level increases, or by outlawing statutory GM labeling
globally (via the WTO) as an 'obstacle to free trade'.

Genetic Food Alert believes that, even in the face of widespread GM
contamination, consumers have the right to know through appropriate
labeling which producers have taken rigorous steps to avoid the use of GM
ingredients or their accidental presence in food items.  GFA calls upon
consumers organisations worldwide to urgently oppose national and
international legal changes designed to remove this right and to alert the
public to any such developments in their nation.


Agenda

Item 11  CRD.1

JOINT FAO/WHO FOOD STANDARDS PROGRAMME CODEX COMMITTEE ON FOOD LABELLING
Twenty-ninth Session Ottawa, Canada, 1 - 4 May 2001

OTHER BUSINESS AND FUTURE WORK PROPOSAL FOR NEW WORK:CLAIMS ON THE ABSENCE
OF FOOD PRODUCED USING GENE TECHNOLOGY (NEGATIVE CLAIMS) (proposal by
Australia and South Africa)

Background

1.      Labelling claims made regarding the absence of food or food
ingredients produced using certain techniques of genetic
modification/genetic engineering, so called 'negative claims', are
increasingly being applied on a voluntary basis by food businesses in many
countries to address a perceived consumer demand or market niche for such
foods. The number of food products carrying such negative labelling claims
often far exceeds the occurrence of positive labels even in countries where
positive labelling is mandatory.

2.      Such negative labelling claims may be regulated under general
provisions within food law regarding false or misleading conduct, and/or
through general provisions within consumer protection or fair trading/trade
practices legislation that regulate false, misleading or deceptive conduct.

3.      Negative labelling claims on food produced using gene technology
however bring with them issues not specifically recognised in such
legislation. For example:- 

§       negative claims made regarding the absence of novel GM components
(recombinant DNA or novel protein) within a food may lead consumers to
conclude gene technology was not used at any step of production,

§       negative claims made on food or ingredients that do not have a
genetically modified/engineered counterpart while truthful may be
deceptive,and

§       negative claims may erroneously be applied to foods or ingredients
which contain GM components but fall below a permitted ingredient threshold
for positive labelling.


_Regulation_and_Guidance_on_Negative_Claims_

4.      Some countries (e.g. Netherlands, Austria and Germany) have
recognised these anomalies difficulties by developing regulations specific
to negative claims for foods produced using gene technology.

5.      Australia provides specific advice on the use and limitation of
negative claims in the Compliance Guide for Labelling of Food Produced
using Gene Technology developed to support positive labelling requirements
coming into effect in December 2001.

6.      The scope and general principles of the Codex General Guidelines on
Claims (clause 1.2) emphasises the importance of regulations on the
representation of food in stating: "no food should be described or
presented in a manner that is false, misleading or deceptive or is likely
to create an erroneous impression regarding its character in any respect".
The Guideline also emphasises (clause 3.5) that: "claims that could give
rise to doubt about the safety of similar food or which could arouse or
exploit fear in the consumer" should be prohibited.

7.      While these general Codex provisions recognise the importance of
setting wide-ranging regulations to prohibit misleading claims, they do not
adequately address issues specific to negative claims for food produced
using gene technology.

8.      The Codex Guideline for the Labelling of Food and Food Ingredients
Obtained Through Certain Techniques of Genetic Modification/Genetic
Engineering (CX/FL 01/7; at Step 3 of the Codex Procedure) incorporates no
guidance with respect to negative claims.

9.      Lack of international harmonisation on the application and use of
negative labelling claims for food produced using gene technology has
potentially serious implications in the trade of such foods. There is thus
an imperative to establish common approaches to regulating such claims.


_Proposal_for_New_Work_

10.     Clear and specific guidance must provided by Codex on the use and
applicability of negative labelling claims for food produced using gene
technology. Developing guidance on this issue may be approached by either:

§       reviewing the Codex General Guideline on Claims to elaborate the
applicability and use of negative claims for food produced using gene
technology, or 

§       incorporating guidance on the issue in the proposed Codex Guideline
for the Labelling of Food and Food Ingredients Obtained Through  Certain
Techniques of Genetic Modification/Genetic Engineering. 


11.     Specific issues on which guidance should be provided include: 

§       The availability and accreditation of evidence to substantiate
statement or claims regarding the absence of food produced using gene
technology;

§       Whether the statement or claim is likely to mislead consumers
regarding the food or ingredients safety, nutritional value or composition
as compared to food or ingredients produced using biotechnology;

§       That where an absolute statement or claim is made, such as "GM
free" the claim applies to the production of all components within the food
or ingredient (such absolute claims should not allow for accidental
presence of a genetically modified component of presence of biotech
components as minor or trace ingredients and would be technically difficult
to enforce);

§       Where the statement or claim cannot beguaranteed, as is likely for
food or ingredients marketed or processed using identity preservation
systems, the statement should be qualified to accurately reflect the
efforts of the manufacturer including systems of accreditation used;

§       Where a food or ingredients produced using gene technology is
specifically exempt from positive labelling, the application of a negative
claim is potentially deceptive and could mislead consumers; and

§       Negative labelling statements or claims should be limited to those
foods or ingredients for which biotech counterparts exist in the market.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
sent on to Pos Fut by David.
(David MacClement) davd@ihug.co.nz 
http://www.geocities.com/davd.geo/index.html#top
************************************************

==^================================================================
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?aVxifP.aVx3Cb
Or send an email To: positive-futures-unsubscribe@igc.topica.com
This email was sent to: archive+pfvs@csf.colorado.edu

T O P I C A  -- Learn More. Surf Less.
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
==^================================================================