from Claire Robinson, WEEKLY WATCH editor
------------------------------------------------------------
Dear all:
That most unaccountable of organizations, the WTO, is rumoured to have ruled against the EU in its battle with the US over its right to refuse GMOs (see WTO).
It looks as if, as so often in disputes involving government bodies and corporate interests, the EU has been fighting with one hand tied behind its back because of the EU Commission's consistent promotion of GM crops and foods. How could they, on one hand, bring forward the science suggesting that GM foods have shown negative health effects when, on the other hand, the EU Commission keeps ignoring the science and forcing through GM approvals against the wishes of member states?
Meanwhile, India has done the sensible thing and is introducing GM labeling (ASIA), and a French court has acquitted 49 GM crop-trashers on the grounds that they were preventing contamination by potentially dangerous genetic material (EUROPE).
Claire This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
www.gmwatch.org / www.lobbywatch.org
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
WTO
AFRICA
THE AMERICAS
ASIA
EUROPE
MIDDLE EAST
LOBBYWATCH
CORPORATE CRIMES
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
GM WATCH NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
GM Watch is asking for your support as we prepare to celebrate 7 years of running our e-mail lists - first launched in January 1999. In order to sustain and extend what we are doing, we need financial donations and the help of people with the language skills to translate our roundups of all the latest news and research so that they reach the widest possible readership. Details of how to help:
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6043
------------------------------------------------------------
WTO
------------------------------------------------------------
+ WTO RULES AGAINST EU IN GMO CASE
The French Network of GATS-Free Communities states that in a December 8 meeting with the French International Trade Minister, Christine Lagard, NGOs got confirmation that the EU has lost the World Trade Organisation (WTO) challenge the US has made against its GM moratorium.
The WTO is due to issue its draft final report on the GM trade dispute lead by the US against Europe on 5 January 2006.
Environmental campaigners have delivered a petition to the WTO signed by more than 135,000 people from 100 countries and by 740 organisations representing 60 million people, demanding the WTO allows European countries to protect their environment, consumers and farming from the risks posed by GM foods.
The US argued heavily for science to be kept out of the dispute, stating that it was a trade complaint and the safety of GM foods was not at stake. However the WTO panel disagreed and set up a group of scientists to examine the facts and report on whether there were scientific grounds for Europe taking such a position. The scientists' report has not been made public.
The European Commission has argued in the WTO that the science on GMOs is constantly evolving and that "new risk considerations sometimes arise spontaneously and change the scope of the risk assessment". They also argue that there are "legitimate scientific concerns" about the use of antibiotic resistant genes and secondary effects of GM crops on beneficial insects.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6035
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6048
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6049
+ MANDELSON ROUNDS ON "FAKE" FOOD AID
The opening day of the high-profile trade summit in Hong Kong got off to a disastrous start on 13 December. A bitter war of words broke out between Europe, the US and the United Nations, and demonstrators wrought havoc inside and outside the convention centre.
Peter Mandelson, the EU's trade chief, triggered a row when he branded the US food aid programme, which delivers American produce to needy countries, as "fake" aid designed to help US farmers rather than the world's poor.
He told delegates from developing countries : "The large, structured US programme of 'in kind' food aid is designed in reality to give support to US agricultural producers. It distorts trade and depresses local production. Statistics show that this aid is directly related to the price shifts for the commodities concerned on the US market."
The current head of the WTO, Pascal Lamy, has alos spoken out on this issue in the past. During the Zambian food aid crisis over the US's dumping of GM grain, the EU's then Trade Commissioner accused the US of using its foreign aid programme as a means to "dispose of its genetically modified crop surpluses. The simple solution is for the US to behave as a real aid donor," he said.
Lamy also hit out in an interview with Newsweek: "Zambia is a sovereign country and makes its own decisions. Zambians do not need to be heroic to assert their sovereignty... GM-free supplies are available in surplus in southern Africa. Europe's policy is to provide food aid procured in the region, rather than as a means of disposing of domestic stocks."
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6050
+ OXFAM'S "FOOD AID OR HIDDEN DUMPING?"
For once Peter Mandelson is saying the same thing as the development agencies. This Oxfam paper shows that current food aid practices, especially those of the US, create substantial adverse effects in trade that damage the livelihoods of poor farmers and block their economic opportunities to develop.
www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/issues/trade/bp71_foodaid.htm
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6050
+ HONG KONG REVERSES EXPULSION OF WTO PROTESTOR BOVE
Hong Kong bowed to pressure from the French government on 12 December and lifted an expulsion order on Jose Bove, the French farmer and anti-globalisation activist, who arrived to observe this week's WTO talks. "Upon my arrival in Hong Kong they seized my passport and took me to a detention centre," Jose Bove said.
Christine Lagarde, the French Trade Minister, asked the authorities to let Jose Bove into the territory after he went on France Inter radio live from a detention centre at the Hong Kong airport.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6045
+ TWO SIDES OF JUSTICE
The Times - a pro-GM Murdoch paper - approvingly reports that, "As a known troublemaker with a criminal record, he [Bove] has been barred from visiting summits in the United States and Canada in the past". It's interesting to contrast this robust treatment of the anti-GM campaiging Bove with how extraordinarily accommodating the Americans and Canadians have been to another figure in the GM debate with criminal convictions for something other than protest.
The GM-supporting director of the Food Safety Network (FSN) at the University of Guelph in Canada has two US convictions for criminal negligence causing death, for which he was sentenced to 17 months in jail. Despite which, Dr Douglas Powell was given a travel waiver by the US authorities that allowed him to enter the US to give lectures etc.
When in 2004 Dr Powell was found guilty of domestic violence in Canada, the judge was persuaded to let Powell off with a discharge. Discharges are normally only granted to first offenders so that they do not acquire a criminal record. Powell, by contrast, already had a criminal record as a result of the two prior convictions for serious criminal offences. But a criminal conviction for domestic violence would have almost certainly served to finally prevent Powell from crossing the border.
So while Dr Powell got off with a discharge for his abusive treatment of his girlfriend so he could continue to travel around the US, Jose Bove faces months in prison and a travel ban to N. America for pulling up GM plants.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6045
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFRICA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ MOST IN SOUTH AFRICA REJECT GM FOODS
Almost six out of 10 South Africans either reject or avoid GM foods, according to a recent poll.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6041
+ U.S. POLICY KEEPS POVERTY ALIVE IN AFRICA
In the run up to the WTO meeting in Hong Kong, the US announced the allocation of $7 million to a West African project intended to introduce GM cotton and help West African countries with their cotton marketing.
This "aid" can be directly measured against the cost and impact of the US's massive cotton subsidies which are now in the spotlight in Hong Kong.
Even the WTO has ruled these subsidies to be wrong. In response to the denunciations of its poverty-creating cotton subsidies, the US has said in Hong King that it is now ready to offer African cotton farmers duty-free access to US markets.
But as Phil Bloomer, head of Oxfam's Make Trade Fair campaign points out, this is little short of a bad joke: "Africa does not export a single gram of cotton to the US and has not done so for years. The problem for West African cotton farmers is not market access - it is the US subsidies that lead to dumping."
The development group Action Aid provides the following costing on the impact of US cotton subsidies:
- Production costs in Africa are amongst the lowest in the world and the cotton quality very high, making African producers potentially some of the most competitive global players.
- Cotton revenues constitute from 50-80% of the exports of Mali, Benin, Togo and Burkina Faso.
- More than 9 million people in West Africa rely on cotton for their livelihood.
- In 2002, the US produced 36% of the world's cotton exports. In the same year, subsidies to its 30,000 cotton farmers amounted to $3.6bn.
- The World Bank (2002) found that an end to all forms of global protection would increase cotton prices by an average of 12.7% over a 10-year period. The largest gains would go to Africa, with exports increased by an average of 12.6%.
- The African countries that rely on cotton are among the poorest of the world.
If the US really wanted to help people in West Africa, it would stop making hollow gestures and pushing GM crops and do what groups like Action Aid and Oxfam are asking:
- announce the immediate elimination of all forms of trade distorting subsidies to the cotton sector
- provide not "aid" but compensation to those involved in the cotton production sectors of poor countries who have suffered as a result of its policies.
But far from offering poor countries even a modicum of redress in this area, a spokesman for the US trade representative responded to the WTO's ruling by defending the US's farm subsidies, saying, "We will defend US agricultural interests in every form we need to."
The US, incidentally, while happily using USAID to push GM crops in countries that it has itself impoverished, spends less than one-half of 1 percent of its federal budget on aid, making it the smallest contributor of foreign aid among major donor governments in terms of national wealth (GNP).
Several articles at http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6051
------------------------------------------------------------
THE AMERICAS
------------------------------------------------------------
+ KELLOGG TO USE GM OIL
Kellogg says it will begin using oils derived from GM soybeans in some products to lower fat content beginning next year.
The world's largest cereal maker will begin using an oil named Vistive, made from Monsanto's GM soybeans. Kellogg says it is one of the first food manufacturers to use the oil to lower levels of trans fat and saturated fat in its products.
GM Watch comment: The low linolenic acid trait in the Vistive soybeans that Kellogg is going to use is actually non-GM. The beans were conventionally bred BUT it is being marketed as the first of the Monsanto's GM crops with consumer benefits.
This sleight of hand was achieved by Monsanto deliberately turning it into a GM crop by adding a GM trait that has absolutely nothing to do with consumer benefits - herbicide resistance!
Incidentally, Iowa State University has conventionally produced an even lower linolenic acid variety than the Monsanto one. Of course, the question is whether the lower-lin variety is going to be made available, given that Monsanto and the other big companies now own so many seed companies, and if not, why not?
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6037
Additional comment from Claire Robinson: looking at this story, you would think that linolenic acid (or alpha-linolenic acid) is a bad thing - the less of it you eat, the better. But linolenic acid is a valuable nutrient, an essential fatty acid, meaning you can't make it in your body and thus have to eat it in sufficient quantities to stay healthy.
So how can these companies claim that a low-linolenic acid oil is good for you? Well, taking the linolenic acid out of oils means it has a longer shelf life without having to be hydrogenated. Hydrogenated oils keep longer and thus are universally used by the margarine and processed food industry, but they create trans fatty acids, which are bad for you. So a low-lin oil might save you from eating so many trans fats, BUT by eating it, you could become deficient in linolenic acid. Most people today, especially children raised on junk food, are already chronically deficient in essential fatty acids, a deficiency which adversely affects brain development, behaviour and learning ability.
A 'study' by Monsanto looks at the impact on linolenic acid intake of substituting low-lin oil for the usual partially hydrogenated soy oil. It concludes that this would not lower dietary linolenic acid intake because it replaces soybean oils that were made lower in linolenic acid via hydrogenation. So the only way Monsanto's oil is healthy is if it is used in place of oils that are even worse!
www.monsanto.co.uk/news/2005/VistiveBrochure.pdf
In other words, Monsanto's low-lin oil's only solves a problem (hydrogenation leading to unnatural fats leading to health problems) that was caused by the food industry in the first place. It is surely preferable to avoid hydrogenated oils altogether, which isn't difficult: it just means cooking with real oils like olive, coconut or sesame oil and keeping away from processed and 'fast' foods.
+ COMPANIES OVERSTATE ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF BIOPHARMING
States like Missouri and Iowa are lining up to grow crops genetically engineered to produce pharmaceuticals and industrial chemicals, in large part because proponents have touted the crops as an engine of rural economic development and farmer prosperity. The states are even willing to commit tax dollars to lure pharm companies to relocate there.
For example, Missouri is negotiating an incentives package for Ventria Bioscience, a Sacramento, Calif.-based company that wants to relocate to Maryville. It has genetically modified rice to produce human proteins for use in drugs.
But a new report by leading agricultural economist Dr Robert Wisner of Iowa State University finds that while some drug and biotech companies may profit from these "pharma crops," farmer benefits are likely to be small and rural community benefits may be much more modest than often portrayed.
With the release of this report, UCS is renewing its call to the US Dept of Agriculture (USDA) to ban the outdoor production of GM pharma crops because of threats to the integrity of the food supply.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6034
+ BIOLOGICS PROJECT CUT FROM $30M TO $12.5M
Plans for the Missouri Center of Excellence for Plant Biologics, which would house Ventria, have been whittled down from nearly $30 million to about $12.35 million, and Northwest Missouri State University officials are waiting to hear from Ventria Biosciences about whether the company still wants to relocate to Maryville.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6034
+ CITIZENS' VIEWS DENIED IN BRAZIL
In the space of just seven days, Brasilia is hosting three national conferences, the culmination of numerous local and state meetings that mobilised hundreds of thousands of people all around Brazil. But that does not make a participatory government, say activists.
"The government encourages the public to speak out, but then it does not listen," said Cindido Grzybowski, director of the Brazilian Institute of Social and Economic Analyses (IBASE), a non-governmental organisation that focuses on public policies and democratic participation.
A high degree of participation "means nothing" if the proposals that are approved fail to produce "real results," said Grzybowski, who cited the case of GM crops, which were staunchly opposed at the first national conference on the environment in 2003 but later given free rein by the government.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6041
------------------------------------------------------------
ASIA
------------------------------------------------------------
+ INDIA TO LABEL GM FOODS
India is to introduce mandatory labeling of GM foods. An expert committee on GM food and ingredients constituted under the chairmanship of the Director-General of Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) had made recommendations for the mandatory labelling. After considering ICMR's recommendations, the Central Committee for Food Standards, a statutory committee under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, recommended that labelling of all GM foods in the country be made mandatory.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6046
+ THAILAND: POLICE TO STEP UP PROBE INTO GM PAPAYA
Police have vowed to step up an investigation into the Agriculture Department's alleged negligence of duty involving the spread of GM papaya. The move came after the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) lodged a complaint with national police chief Pol Gen Kowit Wattana on Thursday, accusing former department chief Chakan Saengruksawong and GM papaya researchers of negligence in containing leakage of the transgenic crop.
Commissioner Vasant Panich said the NHRC decided to lay the complaint against Mr Chakan and researchers in charge of the research project after laboratory tests confirmed leakage of GM papaya outside the department's research station in Khon Kaen province.
The research is conducted by the department and the US-based Cornell University.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6036
+ JAPAN AND BT10
As at 11 November 2005, all the Bt10 contaminated corn which was detected coming into Japan from the US - a total of 38,163 tonnes - has been shipped back to the US.
------------------------------------------------------------
EUROPE
------------------------------------------------------------
+ FRENCH COURT ACQUITS ANTI-GM PROTESTORS
In a judgment expected to send a chill through companies growing GM crops in Europe and embolden their opponents, a French court Friday was cited as acquitting 49 activists who destroyed GM plants after ruling their actions were justified.
The court in Orleans dismissed the criminal charges of organised vandalism against the 49, who had uprooted GM maize in the region planted by Monsanto in two incidents, one last year and the other in 2005.
The court was quoted as saying, "The defendants have shown proof that they committed an infraction of voluntary vandalism in a group to respond to a situation of necessity," and that situation of necessity "resulted from the unbridled distribution of modified genes that constitutes a clear and present danger for the well-being of others, in the sense that it could be the source of contamination and unwanted pollution."
One of the activists, Jean-Emile Sanchez, was quoted as calling the verdict "a huge victory for the anti-GM side" and said the judgment would form an important legal precedent.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6040
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6038
SEE VIDEO: red button by headline
http://euronews.net/create_html.php?page=detail_info&article=325334&lng=1
+DfID IGNORES EVIDENCE ON GM
The UK's Dept for International Development (DFID) continues to assert the potential of biotechnology in its new agricultural strategy ("Growth and Poverty Reduction: The Role of Agriculture"), in spite of growing concerns in southern countries about GM crops, says THE FIVE YEAR FREEZE. http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6039
+ POOR FARMERS ARE HUNGRY FOR A SAY IN AGRICULTURE
Writing in The (UK) Guardian, Patrick Mulvaney says DfID's new paper does not reflect the urgent needs of poor farmers and their organizations.
EXCERPT:
As it is there is little evidence of new policy and nothing on new funding or different ways of working. Instead, many of the old growth and productivity mantras are trotted out. There is support for trade liberalisation, for example, despite mounting evidence that this has led to floods of cheap imports into developing countries that have ruined the livelihoods of millions of poor farmers.
Agribusiness corporations that increasingly affect the lives of the poor are not mentioned - except for the implicit backing the corporations receive. The paper contains no specific mention of GM crops, but instead expresses support for the African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF).
"AATF is a not-for-profit foundation based in Nairobi, led, managed and directed by Africans," says DfID's paper. "It helps farmers access productivity, enhancing agricultural technologies held by the private sector by facilitating public-private partnerships".
But this is half the truth. DfID fails to point out that one of AATF's goals is to negotiate the rights of patented GM crops, and it works with a roll call of biotech patent holders such as Monsanto, DuPont, Dow Agro Sciences and Syngenta. So while not mentioning GM crops in its new policy, DfID is funding an organisation that promotes them - to the tune of GBP5m (2004-8).
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6047
+ CHANCELLOR SLAMMED FOR COSYING UP TO SYNGENTA
UK Chancellor Gordon Brown has been heavily criticised for an unhealthy and "probably improper" relationship with biotech corporation Syngenta, following revelations that Syngenta boss Michael Pragnell attended a meeting at No 11 Downing Street, says GM Free Cymru. Ostensibly the meetings were related to strategy discussions on agriculture in poor countries, and involved the Smith Institute and the "charitable" Syngenta Foundation.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6039
+ THE SYNGENTA DODGY DOSSIER
GM Free Cymru has, within the past nine months, discovered that Syngenta has been involved in a web of lies, deceptions and obstructive corporate behaviour.
For example:
*** Syngenta knew about the contamination of Bt11 by the illegal variety called Bt10 several months before the story was broken by Nature magazine on 22 March 2005. For at least four months Syngenta and the US regulatory authorities connived to keep the contamination incident under wraps, while contaminated grain continued to be distributed on the world market.
*** At first Syngenta stated that "several hundred tonnes" of contaminated maize had found its way into the food chain. This was a lie, and following revelations by GM Free Cymru and others, the corporation had to admit that the real figure was around 150,000 tonnes. GM Free Cymru stands by its calculation that the real figure was around 185,000 tonnes.
Much more at http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6039
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MIDDLE EAST
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ BIOPIRACY AND GMOs: THE FATE OF IRAQ'S AGRICULTURE
Excellent article with above title from the Centre for Research on Globalisation is at
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6042
EXCERPT:
Just before announcing his departure from Iraq and handing "power" to the US-installed band of discredited quislings (the so-called "transfer of [fake] sovereignty"), US proconsul and head of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), Paul Bremer issued "100 Orders" to transfer Iraq's economy and legal ownership of Iraqi resources into the private hands of US corporations. Then, to encourage the looting of Iraq's wealth and increase the suffering of the Iraqi people, the Bush administration issued an "executive order" to indemnify not only the corporate looters from prosecution, but also provides protection to soldiers and private security guards committing crimes against Iraqis. A closer examination of these "100 Orders" and US policy in Iraq shows that the war on Iraq had nothing to do with WMD, terrorism, "democracy" and "liberation," but to colonise Iraq and enrich US corporations at the expense of the Iraqi people.
Order 81 deals specifically with Plant Variety Protection (PVP) because it is designed to protect the commercial interests of corporate seed companies. Its aim is to force Iraqi farmers to plant so-called "protected" crop varieties 'defined as new, distinct uniform and stable', and most likely genetically modified. This means Iraqi farmers will have one choice; to buy PVP registered seeds. Order 81 opens the way for patenting (ownership) of plant forms, and facilitates the introduction of GMOs to Iraq. US agricultural biotechnology corporations, such as Monsanto and Syngenta will be the beneficiaries. Iraqi farmers will be forced to buy their seeds from these corporations.... In the long run, there won't be a big enough gene pool for genetic viability.
+ CRITICS DECRY GM RULE IN IRAQ
An article for The Scientist with this title is at
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6042
EXCERPT:
Recent rule changes allowing farmers to use transgenic wheat species in Iraq to help rebuild the region's agriculture have some critics concerned that the new policy could help wipe out the natural hotbed of diversity in Iraq, where wheat originated.
"Introducing transgenic wheat means replacing this diversity and leaving it to extinction," warned Nagib Nassar, a professor of genetics at the Universidade de Brasilia. "It will be replaced by a monoculture with a very narrow genetic base. This is a problem. This will be a catastrophe."
What's gotten people worried is Order 81, one of 100 orders enacted by Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) Administrator L. Paul Bremer. Issued in 2004, Order 81 authorizes the introduction of GM crops as part of an effort to restore the nation's agricultural base[!!!], and gives intellectual property rights to the developers of new seed varieties.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOBBYWATCH
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ TRUTH SUFFOCATOR MODERATES NEW "SCIENCE-BASED" GM WEBSITE
CS Prakash's AgBioView list is promoting a website called "Gene Genie" - "an Australian online resource" created to provide "science-based information about GM food and crops".
Gene Genie is moderated by Greg Bodulovic and Peta Holmes. Bodulovic is the author of an article prominently promoted on the Gene Genie website: "Is the European Attitude to GM Products Suffocating African Development?"
As we previously noted, Bodulovic's article is marked not just by serious factual inaccuracies and the cherry-picking of questionable source material, but by the citing of sources that turn out not to support the author's claims!
Who better than Bodulovic, then, to run a website which says it "aims to deal with the myths about GM food and crops and to provide the facts to enable users to form an unbiased, informed view on the issue"?
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6052
+ PATRICK MOORE PRAISES U.S. FOR REJECTING KYOTO
A founding member of Greenpeace, who claims to have left the organization because he viewed it as too radical, has praised the US for refusing to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. "At least the [United] States is honest. [The US] said, 'No we are not going to sign that thing (Kyoto) because we can't do that," said Patrick Moore, who is attending the UN Climate Change Conference in Montreal.
GM Watch comment: Patrick Moore is a good example of someone who trumpets his supposed adherence to "sound science" when it comes to GMOs, but who's happy to buck the scientific mainstream when it comes to climate change. Moore also, incidentally, supports nukes, clear-cutting of old growth forests and fish farming.
On climate change, Moore is one of many. Ardent pro-GM organisations taking Exxon-Mobil's money include those listed at:
http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/listorganizations.php
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6033
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORPORATE CRIMES
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ MONSANTO AND DOW AMONG THE 14 WORST CORPORATE EVILDOERS
Monsanto and Dow, both involved in GM crops, are among the 14 worst corporate evildoers, according to a report by human rights NGO Global Exchange.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6044
+ "THE CORPORATION" ON BRIT TV
For those British TV viewers who get Channel 4's More4 channel, the brilliant film The Corporation is on this Monday 19 Dec at 9pm. Don't miss it!