Print

from Claire Robinson, WEEKLY WATCH editor
------------------------------------------------------------

Dear all

A very happy new year to all our readers. This week, we have a number of inspiring YEARLY REVIEWS of anti-GM activities in various countries over the past year, written by people in the vanguard of the resistance.

They include US-based author and campaigner, Luke Anderson, who reports on "possibly the most inspiring year as far as local activism on GM issues in the US is concerned". There will be more reviews from around the world in the weeks to come.

Monsanto's troubles continue BIG TIME, with not only more multi-million dollar losses posted for this quarter, but in the pipleline major unquantifiable liabilities. And now we have a US$ 1.5 million fine for bribing Indonesian officials to give the nod to its GM crops (COMPANY NEWS).

The questions the bribery scandal raises are:

1. If Monsanto was prepared to bribe officials for half a decade to the tune of over $700,000 in one country, what on earth have they been up to in the rest of the world? The bribes were sanctioned from the U.S. and Indonesia may well be just the tip of the iceberg;

2. All the safety approval data for Monsanto's GM
crops - in terms of health - are provided to regulators in countries around the globe by Monsanto themselves. If they'll go to the corrupt lengths we now know they went to in Indonesia in search of a regulatory fix, what are the chances that data is not being manipulated when it is totally under Monsanto's control and there are no checks?

Every single GM approval around the world that Monsanto has been a party to now needs to be urgently reviewed - new *independent* data need to be obtained, and the officials Monsanto dealt with need to be investigated.

Claire This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
www.gmwatch.org / www.lobbywatch.org

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOBBYWATCH
COMPANY NEWS
AWARD FOR JOURNALIST WHO EXPOSED GM HYPE
YEARLY REVIEWS 2004: US, Japan, UK, France
OTHER NEWS

------------------------------------------------------------
LOBBYWATCH
------------------------------------------------------------

+ FRONT GROUP TO HONOUR BORLAUG AT UN WORLD CONFERENCE
A year ago GM WATCH highlighted a conference that its organisers said would make "eco-imperialism" a household word. The conference claimed to expose "The global green movement's war on the developing world's poor". Opposition to GM crops, it claimed, was part of that "war". The conference featured Patrick Moore, CS Prakash of AgBioWorld, and Paul Driessen of the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise. It was primarily organised by the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE).

CORE, which likes to style itself "one of America's premier civil rights organizations", is now to put on what it calls a "UN World Conference-2005" on "Biotechnology: Implications & Realities" (New York, January 17-18, 2005). This UN conference will be opened by the Hon. Roy Innis, the National Chairman of CORE. It will also feature Cyril Boynes, jr of CORE, plus a video of "CORE's fact-finding trip to Africa". The conference will "honour Nobel Peace Prize Laureate and father of the 'Green Revolution', Dr Norman Borlaug".

So who are CORE? Back in the heyday of the civil rights movement, CORE was indeed one of the "premier civil rights organizations". However, during the 1970s CORE all but collapsed and the remnant was taken over by Roy Innis, who moved the organisation to the Republican right.

Black American journalists, Glen Ford and Peter Gamble, describe CORE under Roy Innis as "a tin cup outstretched to every Hard Right political campaign or cause that finds it convenient - or a sick joke - to hire Black cheerleaders". They report how James Farmer, a civil rights hero and the former head of the original Congress of Racial Equality confronted Roy Innis on TV for turning the organization into what Farmer called a "shakedown" gang.
http://www.gmwatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=174

This is the organisation that is now successfully associating itself with the UN and lauding Norman Borlaug and GM. An added irony is that at CORE's event last year, the UN was in the firing line along with "environmentalists" and "anti-biotech activists" as contributing to hunger and poverty in the Third World through its misplaced "eco-imperialism".

Find out more including the fake farmer being deployed at the conference.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4765

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMPANY NEWS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

+ MONSANTO FINED USD 1.5M OVER INDONESIA BRIBES
Monsanto is to pay $1.5m in penalties to the US government over a bribe paid in Indonesia in a bid to bypass controls on the screening of new GM cotton crops.

According to a criminal complaint by the Department of Justice under US anti-bribery laws, the company paid $50,000 to an unnamed senior Indonesian environmental official in 2002, in an unsuccessful bid to amend or repeal the requirement for the environmental impact statement for new crop varieties.

The Financial Times reports, "The [bribe] was delivered by a consultant working for the company's Indonesian affiliate, but was approved by a senior Monsanto official based in the US, and disguised as consultants' fees.

"The company also admitted that it had paid over $700,000 in bribes to various officials in Indonesia between 1997 and 2002, financed through improper accounting of its pesticide sales in Indonesia.

"The attempt to circumvent environmental controls on genetically-modified crops in a developing country is a significant embarrassment for Monsanto, which is engaged in an ongoing campaign to win public support in the European Union for its genetically modified crops."

In how many other countries around the world have similar things been going on? This is very probably the tip of the iceberg.

***Read the full articles from the Financial Times and Associated Press***
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4773

+ MONSANTO'S LOSSES CONTINUE - MASSAGED BY TAX BENEFIT
Monsanto have been talking themselves up throughout 2004 but they still managed to make a net loss of GBP21m (USD40m) for the fiscal first quarter ended Nov. 30. Although they're flagging this up as a big improvement on the GBP51m (USD97 million) loss they reported a year ago, their shares fell 3 percent.

However, the actual loss would have been far greater than last year if Monsanto hadn't been able to offset a tax benefit of GBP56m. That tax benefit was itself triggered by the losses Monsanto has been making.

Without the tax benefit, instead of "pruning" its losses in the last quarter to GBP21m, they would have been a record GBP77m, i.e. 26 million pounds higher than even a year before.

Meanwhile, looming in the background is the news that the company quietly released during the Xmas holiday. Monsanto has been forced to set up a liability fund following the bankruptcy of its chemicals division, Solutia (part of the old Monsanto).

This reserve fund does *NOT* cover most of the liabilities that drove Solutia into bankruptcy, which have yet to be quantified! These include the cost of dealing with hazardous PCBs that spread from former Monsanto plants.

It's hardly surprising that a number of analysts warn that Wall Street has been seriously overvaluing the company.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4771

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
AWARD FOR JOURNALIST WHO EXPOSED GM HYPE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two African journalists have just received awards for their work in 2004. One is the Kenyan journalist, Gatonye Gathura, who blew the whistle on one of the most hyped GM projects in the world.

The Monsanto-World Bank-USAID GM sweet potato project in Kenya has generated literally thousands of column inches of PR without a scrap of convincing evidence to support it.

But Gatonye Gathura's article in the Kenyan press, "GM Technology fails local potatoes", exposed the reality - the results of 3 years of field trials showed the GM virus-resistant sweet potatoes produced poor yields and weren't even virus resistant!

Gathura's arrticle led on to wider coverage of the project's failure, including by the New Scientist, "Monsanto's showcase project in Africa fails" (New Scientist, Vol 181 No. 2433, 7 February 2004)
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=2561

The GM sweet potato project has been used as a showcase to promote GM as the saviour of Africa, not least by the scientist who has been called Monsanto's apostle in Africa - Dr Florence Wambugu.

On the strength of the supposed success of the GM sweet potato, Wambugu has written for the science journal Nature, for The New York Times, and has appeared on CNN and on various American TV shows. In an issue of Forbes magazine in December 2001, Wambugu was named one of fifteen people from around the globe who will "reinvent the future."

All of this was based on a lie.

For more on the GM sweet potato hype, which even included the falsification of information on yields, see: http://www.gmwatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=131

For Gatonye Gathura's original article in Kenya's "Daily Nation", see: http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=2481

For details of the Kalam Awards 2004
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4769

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
YEARLY REVIEWS 2004
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here are (sometimes radically) shortened versions of yearly reviews sent to us by GM activists around the world. For full versions with multiple web links and appendices, go to the URL at the end of each item.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
US: California and Hawaii - by Luke Anderson
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

2004 has been an upsetting year for supporters of the environment, peace and social justice in the US. Partly in response to the difficulty of shifting the political landscape on a national level, people are increasingly turning to ways in which they can effect change in their communities. And in this respect, it has been possibly the most inspiring year as far as local activism on GM issues in the US is concerned.

GRASSROOTS RESISTANCE
In Vermont, town-to-town educational efforts led to 79 towns passing resolutions against GMOs. This grassroots organising provided the political base for Vermont to pass a groundbreaking seed-labelling bill at state level, the first of its kind in the US.  There has also been progress on a state bill holding biotech corporations liable for unintended contamination of conventional or organic crops by GM materials.

In California, the political space opened up for us in March, when voters in Mendocino county passed the first law in the US to ban GMO release into the environment. Most people around the world understandably seem to have the impression that people in the US must be supportive of genetic engineering. But this was the first time anyone in the US had the chance to vote on a county law banning the planting of GMOs, and we won.

Despite more than $600,000 pumped into the county by the biotech industry in a massive disinformation campaign (which worked out at $55 for every "no" vote), the new GMO law was supported by 56.5% of voters.

"No amount of money can replace the love and commitment of people who care passionately about the place they live," said Doug Mosel, spokesperson for the Mendocino campaign. "This is a turning point in the corporate domination of the food system and a reclaiming of responsibility for agriculture at a local level."

Supporters of the initiative ranged from the local sheriff to the West Coast's largest commercial fishing association, representing 26 commercial fishing and port associations from San Diego to Alaska. The GMO issue broke across many of the traditional political boundaries that often remain fairly closed in other environmental or social debates. A number of Republican voters in the county apparently preferred to align with a group that included people they would normally scorn as "radicals, hippies and environmentalists" than to identify with the big corporations. This is troubling to the biotech industry, and the press coverage after Mendocino voters approved the GMO ban portrayed dumbfounded industry executives.

"We don't want to see this pick up any steam," said Allen Noe of CropLife America.  "We have to do something. With all the political subdivisions in the country, if every county started regulating what we do, the industry would grind to a halt." The industry is well aware that the Mendocino victory could have a domino effect across the country. "How to stop that is unclear", said Noe.

OPPOSING BIO 2004
In June 2004, at the same time as the G8 leaders were meeting under heavily guarded conditions in Georgia, biotech corporations met in San Francisco for their largest meeting ever, attended by over 17,000 industry executives. In response to these two meetings, a week-long series of educational events and protests were organised in San Francisco called "Reclaim the Commons". These educational events and protests focused on genetic engineering and life patents in the context of the "commons" - all that which we inherit freely and hold in trust for future generations which is being stolen from us, polluted and privatised. The educational events at Reclaim the Commons were attended by over a thousand people.

MORE GMO BANS
By the end of the summer, there were four more counties in California who had gathered enough signatures to qualify for a vote on a GMO ban for the November elections, and one more county, Trinity, which had already joined Mendocino in passing an initiative banning GMO crops and animals.

The industry had studied its PR failure in Mendocino County, and put together a far more sophisticated campaign to try to squash this burgeoning movement towards a GMO free California. They realised in the Mendocino campaign that people didn't like corporations based thousands of miles away pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into opposition to local measures. So in the campaigns for the November elections the money was funnelled through local pro-industrial pro-GMO farm groups, and the local campaigners were made to look like the outsiders and the local farm communities the ones who were opposed to the GMO free zones. This was backed by a barrage of advertising, as well as the support of editorial boards of local corporate newspapers. In addition, there were systematic attacks from California University professors with careers in genetic engineering. This was a lot for local groups with limited resources to deal with.

But this is an issue that people feel very affected by, and we were able to do pretty well. We won with 61% of the vote in Marin County, and managed to get about 40% of the vote in Butte and San Luis Obispo. Humboldt county had a lot of support for a GMO ban, but the local group had to withdraw its campaign due to problems with the language of the proposed measure.

So we have three counties in northern California which are now GMO free zones, Mendocino, Trinity and Marin, and several headed in this direction in 2005/3006. It is likely that the industry will make every effort to introduce a bill or legal challenge to undermine these efforts, but it's not going to be straightforward for them.

HAWAII
Hawaii has the highest concentration of experimental testing of GMOs anywhere on the planet.

In one visit in February 2004 to a seed company planting experimental GMO corn, I asked a corporate executive what he did with the "barrier" corn. (This is the corn planted around the edges of the experimental GM corn which is supposed to pick up most of the pollen coming from the experimental corn as a barrier to stop genetic pollution. Hmm.) He told me that this barrier corn was all destroyed, but refused to say how. The following day I met some of the local farm workers who told me that they receive it as a bonus to take home and feed their families.

Grassroots opposition to genetic engineering has been building steadily over the last 2 year and there are now several groups very active across the islands. The first major victory in 2004 was a resolution against GM coffee passed by the Hawaii coffee association. This was followed later in the year by a resolution by Maui Land and Pine, one of the biggest Ag corporations on the islands.

The groups in GMO-free Hawaii released a study of contamination from the world's first commercially planted GM tree, the papaya. There has been widespread contamination of organic farms, wild lands and household gardens by the GM papaya in Hawaii, and the tests conducted by these groups showed the extent of this, and that even the supposedly non-GMO seed sold by the University of Hawaii had low levels of contamination.

Also being investigated are contamination and human health problems coming from field experiments such as the pharmaceutical crops which have been planted all over the islands. There has been no public right to know about the location of these experiments, but in August a lawsuit was won against the USDA ordering the USDA to reveal the location of these test sites.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4772

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
UK - by Brian John, GM Free Cymru
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

PEOPLE POWER AND THE POLITICS OF THE MAD-HOUSE
We have a good deal to celebrate. The GM industry has effectively pulled out of the UK, and there is now not a single GM variety in the seed listing pipeline.

We have seen an extraordinary demonstration of people power, with a host of NGOs, consumer organizations and special interest groups taking on - and defeating - the GM multinationals, the British government and a GM propaganda industry. http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4770
See also Jean Saunders of GM-ACT's pick of the 17 highlights from the year in the UK.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4770

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scotland - by Anthony Jackson, Munlochy GM Vigil
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

LITTLE SUPPORT FOR COMMERCIALISATION
In 2004 the Scottish Parliament debated the commercialisation of GM crops and came within a single vote of blocking GM crop cultivation across the whole UK.

Jack McConnell, Scotland's First Minister and head of the Scottish Executive, has said: "I believe that almost all members of the Parliament are sceptical about GM crops. I am sceptical about GM crops."

...The movement for GM-free zones in Scotland is increasing, with virtually the entire North of Scotland maintaining and extending this position during 2004.

This is by no means the time to become complacent. Government and industry networks have not given up. Corporate liability is crucial and the issue of imported animal feed has to be seriously addressed, especially with over half of the world's soya now GM. As we can begin now to politically clean up on home ground, the need to support and open up the encouraging campaign successes in the USA is incumbent on all of us. The fight must be taken to the heartland.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
France
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

2004 was a busy year in France for those involved in campaigning against GM crops. There has been much action at both local and national level to keep GM crops and GM food out of the food chain.

FIELD TESTS
Despite widespread opposition, there have been 61 field tests of GM crops in 13 departements of France during 2004. On 28 April 2004, Confederation Paysanne ("Peasants' Confederation") demanded that open field tests be stopped and called for a national day of opposition to GM on 8 May. In response, Herve Gaymard, the Minister of Agriculture, announced on 1 June that the open field trials would continue.

THE YEAR OF THE VOLUNTEER REAPER
The following day (2 June) activists responded in a symbolic action, destroying a crop of GM rapeseed growing near Toulouse. July and August saw a number of further actions, including 160 "volunteer reapers" destroying a field of GM maize near Pithiviers (department of Loiret). Demonstrators included Yves Contassot (assistant to the mayor of Paris) and Francine Bavay (Vice President of the regional council for the Ile-de-France region).

FAKE PERSUADERS
The "fake persuaders" made a brief appearance in France during August when Pierre Pagesse, a farmer and managing director of the biotechnology firm Biogemma, claimed to have established a group of grass-roots supporters for GM technology. Further investigation has shown that no such group exists.

RAFFARIN GOVT SHOWS ITS TRUE FACE
The demonstration on the 25 September in the Vienne marked a turning point for anti-GM campaigners in France, who had previously been used to a "softly softly" approach from law enforcement officers. Police used tear gas and stun grenades against the group of 500 demonstrators, leading to a number of people being injured. It seems that the police had been briefed to come down hard on demonstrators.

Speaking after the demonstration, Jose Bove of Confederation Paysanne stated that Prime Minister Raffarin's government had shown its true face in wanting to impose GM crops and the rule of the multinationals. Bove suggested that anti-GM actions could no longer take place in public during the day and should therefore happen under cover of darkness.

The effectiveness of this advice was proven on 3 October when thirty volunteer reapers decontaminated an experimental field of GM maize in Varois-et Chaignot near Dijon, an action which avoided the attention of police by being carried out at night.

A number of people arrested during 2004 actions are still awaiting trial.

THE GOVT AND PUBLIC "CONSULTATION"
In contrast to previous years, the French Government has been more overt in its support of GM and the biotech industry. A statement issued by the Minister of Agriculture, following the destruction of crop trials in August and September, said: "Research on biotechnologies offers great potential for health, human food and the environment"

This despite the overwhelming rejection of GM food and GM crops by the French public and the absence of independent safety testing by any French scientific or governmental organisation. The body responsible for providing opinions on GM is the Commission du Genie Biomoleculaire (CGB). The CGB, like its British equivalent, the ACNFP, is packed full of individuals who make their living from the biotech industry.

Two public "consultations" were carried out by the government during the year... The July/August 2004 "consultation" showed that out of 673 items of correspondence received, fewer than 10% were in favour of GM field tests ... At a local level, some 3000 mayors have signed declarations assuring GM-free status for their towns and villages.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Japan - by Akiko Frid, NO! GMO Campaign
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

PEOPLE POWER
Consumers in Japan have been active in opposing GMO since 1996, and have achieved several notable victories over the years, including the successful citizens' campaign to stop Monsanto's GM rice in Aichi prefecture in December 2002. In December 2003 there was a similar victory in Iwate prefecture.

And in 2004, there came the most remarkable victory of all, after Japanese consumers visited Canada and the USA to present a petition opposing the commercialisation of GM wheat to the Canadian federal government and a state government of the USA (North Dakota). The petition was signed by 414 organizations representing over 1.2 million Japanese people. The headline says it all: "Monsanto suspends development of herbicide resistant GM wheat".

People power brought the global biotech juggernaut to a grinding halt. READ ON....
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4767

See also in the same series, '2004 - The farmer's view from Australia'
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4758

------------------------------------------------------------
OTHER NEWS
------------------------------------------------------------

+ US GOVT PROPOSAL PUTS FOOD SUPPLY AT RISK
In his Spilling the Beans newsletter, Jeffrey M. Smith, author of Seeds of Deception, points out that recent legislation proposed by the US FDA to legalise food contamination by experimental GMOs could lead to a doomsday scenario. He's not the only one to think so - such a scenario, involving a forced recall and destruction of the global wheat supplies, was suggested by a TV programme, Doomsday Tech, shown on the History Channel throughout the US on December 28, 2004.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4768

+ THE FUTURE OF FOOD - MUST-SEE DOCUMENTARY
A new documentary on the politics driving the food industry made by Deborah Koons Garcia is being tipped as having an impact comparable to last year's Fahrenheit 911. It has already sparked a wave of community action across the US.

Organic and consumer groups are organising neighbourhood house parties to screen the film and get around the reluctance of American television networks and mainstream cinemas to show it.

"The Future of Food," completed in July, highlights the role of US corporations and government in driving international developments in agriculture, and the need for consumers to insist on having the final say in determining what we eat. The film breaks down the science of genetic engineering into explanations anyone can follow, outlines the behind-the-scenes moves which opened the way for corporations to claim patents on the world's seed stocks, and hears directly from US and Canadian farmers who have been forced to destroy family stocks of heritage seed built up over generations and replace it with patented seed. The images of Percy Schmeiser dumping 10 tonnes of localised heritage seed will break any farmer's heart.

Garcia said, "The response to the film has been overwhelming and positive. It has appeared in top festivals like the Margaret Mead Film Festival at the Natural History Museum in New York, has been taken up by food lovers like Alice Waters, has been used by activists in thousands of screenings in community centers, church basements and living rooms. It's playing in theaters and organic gatherings, like EcoFarm and The Midwest Organic Farmers conference. It's been screened by Jehovah's Witnesses and Healthcare professionals. It's being used in benefits for GE Free Hawai'i, The Organic Seed Alliance, Slow Food and many others. It's been taken off to Bulgaria, Indonesia, Brazil - and New Zealand. If someone has $20 and 5$ for shipping, they can buy and show the film. Theatrical screenings are even better - community!"

For the review by Allan Baddock and background to the film by Deborah Koons Garcia see:
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=4764