Repeal of Genetic Engineering Ban Policies | Green Party of Canada

Repeal of Genetic Engineering Ban Policies | Green Party of Canada:

Code: 

 G14-P08

Submitter: 

 Stefan Klietsch

Comments: 

This policy motion will force a rewrite of G06-p14, G06‐p34, G06‐p53, 1998 Environment, 1996 and 1998 Agriculture policies, which declare support for a complete ban on the Canadian use of genetic engineering in agriculture and pesticides, and oppose experimentation and research by Agriculture Canada.

Preamble: 

WHEREAS national science academies of the U.S., Britain, Germany, France, China, India, Brazil, and Mexico, Third World Academy, World Health Organization, International Council for Science, European Academies Science Advisory Council, Health Canada, U.S. National Research Council, American Medical Association, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Society of Toxicology, Washington State Academy of Sciences, American Society for Cell Biology, American Society of Plant Biologists, Scientific American magazine, Science magazine, European Commission’s review of 130 studies across 25 years from 500 independent research groups, an Italian review of 1783 studies, and 600 peer-reviewed papers have concluded that genetically engineered foods are safely regulated;

WHEREAS bioengineered organisms from anthocyanin-rich purple tomatoes to vitamin A-rich golden rice have no universal biochemical traits distinct from products developed through thousands of years of traditional breeding;

WHEREAS peer-reviewed literature over a 20-year timeframe found bioengineered Bt contributing to biodiversity through decreased insecticide usage in northern China (Nature, 2012), with similar findings from a Landes Bioscience review of 155 papers (Carpenter, 2011), and a Nature Biotechnology review of 49 peer-reviewed journals surveying farmers of 12 countries, finding the greatest bioengineering benefits for developing world farmers (Carpenter, 2010);

WHEREAS dissenting papers identifying health harms in animals have methodological errors such as missing hypotheses, testing of specific products like NK603 instead of the engineering process, or retraction like with the Food and Chemical Toxicology journal to the 2012 Seralini study;

Operative: 

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Green Party of Canada will support Health Canada’s existing regulatory regime for genetically engineered foods and will permit bioengineering experimentation by Agriculture Canada.

Sponsors: 

Alex Hill, Scott McNaughton, Andrew Scott, Gordon James McDowell, Ike Bottema, Jackson Mitchell, Ottawa-West Nepean EDA

Background: 

This policy motion seeks to rewrite G06-p14, G06‐p34, G06‐p53, 1998 Environment, 1996 and 1998 Agriculture policies, which declare support for a complete ban on the Canadian use of genetic engineering in agriculture and pesticides, and oppose experimentation and research by Agriculture Canada. No scientific organizations are identified as supporting these existing policies. The policy motion seeks to protect the Green Party’s reputation as the pro-science party that accepts the conclusions of the same global-wide
scientific organizations that warn of the grave threat of global warming, as well as maintaining the possibility of using genetically engineered innovations for environmental and health purposes. Many scientists equate
the anti-bioengineering movement with the climate denial movement as equally ideological, and so this motion addresses voters who do not wish to choose one anti-science party over another.

Under existing Health Canada regulations it is a seven to ten year process to research, develop, test, and assess the safety of a new bioengineered food. 81 products have been approved to date. Regulations were developed in consultation with the World Health Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization, the Codex Alimentarius Commission, and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. See the following sources:
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/gmf-agm/fs-if/faq_1-eng.php
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/sr-sr/pubs/biotech/reg_gen_mod-eng.php
http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/biotech/20questions/en/

The policy motion is neutral on the possible merits of other existing policy from G06-p34 of consumer freedom and informed consent to labelled genetically-engineered foods, though the free and informed consumption inherent in mandatory labelling policy is incompatible with ban policies. The motion does not challenge policies for reform of the biotechnology patent system.

Related Discussion: 

 read more >> -- en savoir plus >>