A-Infos (en) Why French Farmers took direct action.

[elisa@tao.ca]

 ________________________________________________
      A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
            http://www.ainfos.ca/
 ________________________________________________

>Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 20:10:51 GMT
>X-Sender: allsorts@pop.gn.apc.org
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>To: rts@gn.apc.org
>From: "Allsorts (also rts)" <allsorts@gn.apc.org>
>Subject: ALLSORTS -Why French Farmer took direct action.
>X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tao.ca id PAA00239
>
>What follows is a moving account of why the French Farmers from
>Confederation Paysanne destroyed GE maize. It is written by  Jose Bove, one
>of the farmers that stood trial for this 'crime'.
>I hope it inspires all of you.
>
>**********************************************
>For those that have not heard about this action before, the background
>article is pasted below the account.
>You may want to read it before you read the account - then again you may not!
>
>**********************************************
>
>Madame,
> Today, I am present in this court together with Rene Riesel and Francis
>Roux, accused of committing a serious crime according to the law.
> The alleged crime is: the destruction of sacks of genetically modified maize.
> Yes, this is serious, and that’s why I assume full responsibility for it. I
>am not going to hide behind  collective, anonymous responsibility. As a
>trade unionist in the Confederation Paysanne, I believe in the ability of
>everyone to act as an individual. There is no place in our trade union for a
>heirarchy of responsibility. Each member of the union plays a main part in
>her or his own future, and is fully engaged in this. The strength of our
>union movement rests on this determination to mobilise free individuals who
>accept all the consequences of their acts knowing fully the motive for them.
> Yes, on the 8th of January I participated in the destruction of genetically
>modified maize, which was stored in Novartis’s grain silos in Nerac. (And
>the only regret I have now, is that I wasn’t able to destroy more of it.)
> I knew that by acting in this way I was doing something illegal. But it was
>necessary, and we had no other choice. The way in which genetically modified
>agricultural products have have been imposed on European countries didn’t
>leave us with any alternative.
> When was there a public debate on gentically modified organisms? When were
>farmers and consumers asked what they think about this?  Never.
> The decisions have been taken at the level of the World Trade Organisation,
>and state machinery complies with the law of market forces. The WTO dictates
>its own law on the opening of trade barriers. The obligation to import
>bovine somatotrophine meat from the USA is a good example of this. The Panel
>of the WTO, the true policeman of world trade, decides what’s “good” for
>both countries and their people, without consultation or a right of appeal.
> The countries or groups of countries which refuse the importation of bovine
>somatotrophine meat or genetically modified products have to prove that
>these are dangerous, and not the inverse! The Codex Alimentaris, the norm
>dictated by the multinationals, is there to fix the rules of the game!
> Why refuse something which is presented as “progress”?  It’s not because of
>old fashionedness, or regret for the “good old days”. It’s because of
>concern for the future, and because of a will to have a say in future
>development. I am not opposed to fundamental research. I think that it would
>be illusory and detrimental to want to curb it. On the other hand, I don’t
>think that every application of research is necessarily desired, at the
>human, social or environmental level.
> The current discussion on cloning is like the one on  genetic
>modifications. Is everything that is possible actually desired by and
>gainful for people?
> Today, no intelligent person can say that genetically modifed maize is an
>example of progress, neither for agriculture, nor for the economy. On the
>other hand, the greatest concerns surrounding genetically modified maize are
>as equally  important for human health as for nature.
> Novartis’s Bt maize is associated with multiple long-term risks because of
>the presence of the three introduced genes. Even the director of Novartis
>recognises that a “zero risk” simply doesn’t exist. Is this an admission of
>powerlessness, or a way in which to cast aside his future responsibility in
>case there are problems? The problems arising today with certain
>agricultural practices (such as animal-based feeds, the effects on bee
>populations  etc.) only serve to reinforce our caution when dealing with the
>sorcerer’s apprentices.
> The biggest danger which genetically modified maize represents, as well as
>all the other GMOs, is the impossibility of evaluating the long-term
>consequences of their use, and to follow their effects on the environment,
>animals and humans.
> No separation of genetically modified and non-manipulated products is
>carried out. For example, non-manipulated and genetically modified soja are
>actually mixed together when they arrive in France. As a result, there is no
>way of tracing the genetically modified soja. There is no choice left,
>neither for the producer, of which I am one, nor for the consumer, amongst
>whom we all number. What’s going to happen about the French AOC label which
>verifies the origin of a product, and other labels which indicate quality?
> What guaranteee can we offer to those who claim to eat healthy products?
> This type of culture also poses a threat to the future of farmers. For some
>decades productionism has served to enslave farmers. From being a producer,
>the farmer has now become someone who is exploited, who can no longer decide
>on her or his way of managing the land, nor freely choose her or his
>techniques for this. However, a real revolution has been taking place for
>the last 15 years amongst members of the Confederation Paysanne, who have
>put this other type of agriculture back into action. Today, more and more
>farmers lay claim to a farmer’s agriculture, which is more autonomous,
>economic, and which integrates problems associated with the environment,
>employment, and regional planning. We are faced with a real choice for society.
> - either we accept intensive production and the huge reduction in the
>number of farmers in the sole interests of the World Market, - or, we create
>a farmer’s agriculture for the benefit of everyone.   Genetically modified
>maize is also the symbol of a system of agriculture and a type of society
>which I refuse to accept. Genetically modified maize is purely the product
>of technology, where the means become the end. Political choices are swept
>aside by the power of money.
> Agriculture is a perfect illustration of this type of logic, which pervades
>every facet of food production. Agricultural production has now become the
>agro-industry. From the farmers who formed their small cooperatives, we have
>seen a conversion to the firms who have rationalized their systems of
>production in order to maximize profits on their investments. Since the
>1920s, maize in the USA has been hybridized in order to oblige all farmers
>to buy seeds through a trust.
> The trusts merged in order to invest in new techniques, which were capable
>of releasing new profits.
> Novartis, the world’s leading pharmaceutical group, invests billions in
>order to remain number one: they sell seeds, herbicides, pesticides and
>medicines. But competition is strong, and as a result of the merger which
>took place between two of their main competitors last week, they have
>announced a plan to lay-off 2000 employees in order to assure their
>shareholders of the profitablility of the company.
> Is it this kind of logic we want?
>No - I reject this lurch forwards where the aim of the economy isn’t to
>satisfy needs, but is merely production for production’s sake, without any
>link to the interests of the individual or the whole.
> Do we need genetically modified maize in Europe?
> No - in 1997 the maize production increased yet again. It’s overflowing the
>silos. The European Union has to stock the excess. And who’s got to pay for
>this - citizens. Who needs these new seeds? No-one - it’s only Novartis who
>wants to get the returns on its investment and remain the number one
>pharmaceutical group in the world!
> By destroying the genetically modified maize seeds on the 8th of January at
>the Novartis factory in Nerac, we wanted to put this short-sighted logic
>into the spotlight.
> A democratic debate simply doesn’t exist. The conspiracy of silence
>organised by the companies and the sovereign states is the sole logic which
>prevails. Like with the blood contaminated with the HIV virus, or mad cow
>disease, the public musn’t be alarmed. Everything has to be allowed to
>continue in silence.
> By appearing before you today, I’m aware of being in breach of the law
>which wants every citizen to be content with expressing her or his views by
>simply putting their vote in the urn every six years.
>
> But it’s not in this way that social and economic problems are resolved -
>on the contrary.
> Through the action which we undertook and for which we are being judged, we
>kicked-off a vast citizen’s movement whch refuses the use of GMOs in
>foodstuffs for animals and for humans. These actions will stop when this mad
>logic comes to a halt.
> Yes, this action was illegal, but I lay claim to it because it was
>legitimate. I don’t demand clemency, but justice. Either we have acted in
>everyone’s interest and you will acquit us, or we have shaken the
>establishment and in that case you will punish us.
> There is no other issue.
>
> 3rd February 1998, Agen, France
>
> JOSE BOVE
>
>****************
>background article:
>
>On January 8th 1998, one hundred and twenty members of the Confédération
>Paysanne the 2nd largest French Farmers Union, entered a Novartis
>conditioning and storage plant/stocking factory in Nérac (France) and
>destroyed transgenic (GE) maize seeds. This was in order to protest against
>the decision of the French government last November, to clear the production
>of gene-altered maize, thus reversing a ban on cultivation imposed by the
>previous conservative government. After ‘looking around’ they finally found
>5 tons of transgenic maize which they mixed up with non-modified maize
>before humidifying it  - rendering it useless.
>The modified maize has been at the centre of European debate over the use of
>genetic technologies in agriculture for over a year, with Austria and
>Luxembourg maintaining national import bans despite EU marketing approval
>given in December 1996.
>Genetically modified to resist attack by the European corn borer through the
>addition of the "Bt" bacterial toxin gene, the Novartis maize is also
>herbicide resistant and contains an antibiotic resistance gene introduced as
>a marker.
>Novartis has estimated the damages to 30 tons (more or less 2 to 5.000.000
>FF) and claimed 1 million US Dollars in damages (the five tons of seeds
>destroyed were apparently ‘total seed’ kept in cold storage).
>Three of the people involved were arrested and put on trial on the 3rd of
>February.
>Coinciding with the start of the trial, a coalition of consumers, farmers
>and environment groups launched a campaign to reverse the French government
>decision allowing the cultivation of the genetically altered maize. The
>weekend before the trial opponents of GE staged protests at two Novartis
>sites in northern and central France.
>During the trial the court was packed out and about a thousand people
>gathered outside. About eleven varied and distinguished witnesses addressed
>the court on the folies of GM maize.
>Sentence was passed on February 18th. Rene Reisel and Jose Bove face an 8
>month suspended prison sentences and Francis Roux 5 months. Novartis, which
>owned the maize, was awarded FFr500,000 (Ecu75,000) in compensation.
>Although the act of the farmers was made in the public interest, and aimed
>to bring to full attention the political expediency, scientific deficit and
>lack of democracy of the imposition of genetechnologies, and specifically
>the maize, the judge was not really interested. The farmers were given heavy
>sentences. It is not clear whether the three farmers will appeal the
>decision or whether they will agree to pay Novartis.
>René Riesel, one of the farmers involved, is national secretary of
>Confédération Paysanne, which represents smaller farmers, the association
>has strongly supported the three defendants during the trial.
>Though a "guilty" verdict was never in doubt, the case has sparked broader
>discussions in France over the risks and benefits of using genetically
>modified crops in agriculture.  In questions to agriculture minister Louis
>Le Pensec tabled on the day of the hearing, several MPs demanded more
>details of the government's plans to hold Danish-style "consensus
>conferences" on the issue of transgenic plants.  The minister responded by
>announcing
>a debate for June.
>Preparations have already begun, with the French parliamentary office for
>scientific and technological evaluation holding hearings for industry, union
>and public interest groups.  An initial report will be published in mid-May,
>and will be used as the basis for the larger public consensus conference.
>Contacts:  Parliamentary office of scientific and technological evaluation,
>tel: +33 1 40 63 88 19;
>Confédération Paysanne (http://www.mygale.org/00/confpays/qsn.htm), tel: +33
>1 43 62 04 04.
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>*The rts genetics lists now have their own address <genetics@gn.apc.org>.
>If you would like to be a list (and are not already) reply to
><genetics@gn.apc.org> putting 'Subscribe Genetics' in the subject box. There
>is a very busy list & a less 'full-on' list just to receive Genetix Update
>newsletter & action alerts - please specify.
>*We also run the very busy 'Allsorts list' from here <allsorts@gn.apc.org>
>as well as the  'rts info only list' (please specify) when subscribing.
>*If you have anything to contribute to any of these lists then send it in
>and it will be forwarded - unedited wherever possible. Please do not send
>attachments my machine cannot cope with them; instead just add text to
>emails main body.
>You will see that <allsorts@gn.apc.org> will be the return address for all
>emails both genetics and otherwise until we can afford new software. Hope
>this does not cause too much confusion!
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Genetic Engineering Network
>PO BOX 9656
>London
>N4 4JY
>0181 374 9516 (this no is for Genetics info)
>For genetics action info on the web check out:
>http://www.envirolink.org/orgs/shag/genetix.html
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Reclaim The Streets can still be contacted via <rts@gn.apc.org>.
>



	***A-INFOS DISCLAIMER - IMPORTANT PLEASE NOTE***

A-Infos disclaims responsibility for the information in this message.


			********
		The A-Infos News Service
			********
		COMMANDS: majordomo@tao.ca
		REPLIES: a-infos-d@tao.ca
		HELP: a-infos-org@tao.ca
		WWW: http://www.ainfos.ca/