Health Canada’s policy proposal, which effectively allows corporate self-regulation, could legitimize the idea of allowing corporations to assess product safety.
The increasing power of the corporate agricultural sector is an ever more threatening reality, as the chemical industry exerts its influence to capture all of the regulatory processes that would prevent total control over the food system. An example is the apparent collaboration of corporations, NGOs, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to undermine the integrity of The United Nations Food Systems Summit, set to be held this summer from July 26-28 in Rome. Completely ignoring the calls of civil society groups and food sovereignty activists, the focus of the event has been steered away from agroecology and sustainable practices towards technological pseudo-solutions, gene editing, and industrial Ag methodology. This is just the start of a planned transition to large-scale high-tech robotic agriculture that inevitably leaves small, independent farmers out of the picture.
North America is a particularly profitable market for chemical giants like Bayer Crop Science, due to almost nonexistent restrictions on GM crops and herbicide use. Now, as the world is distracted by the ongoing Covid-19 crisis, the Canadian government is attempting to further abdicate its duty by allowing industry self-regulation of many new GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms). In response to lobbying from CropLife Canada, a corporate lobby group, Health Canada is launching a public consultation regarding new guidelines that would deregulate certain types of genetic engineering, including a relatively new technique known as gene editing. The claim is that they are merely exempting “plants with genetic modifications that are not the result of the insertion of foreign DNA.” However this is a misleading statement, implying that genome editing methods - such as the CRISPR/Cas system of gene modification - are manipulated less than older transgenic GMOs, and do not merit safety concerns. Technically and legally, gene editing is genetic engineering.
Concerned citizens can find out more details about the proposal at https://cban.ca/noexemptions, and send feedback to Health Canada by emailing hc.bmh-bdm.sc@canada.ca. The consultation runs until May 24th, 2021.
Health Canada’s policy proposal, which effectively allows corporate self-regulation, is a dangerous precedent that could legitimize the idea of allowing for-profit institutions to take sole responsibility for product safety. According to Lucy Sharratt, Coordinator of CBAN (Canadian Biotechnology Action Network), “Corporate self-regulation would create a dangerous dependence on safety assurances from product developers. The new genetic engineering techniques of genome editing require rigorous independent safety assessment.”
By removing regulatory impediments for “plants with genetic modifications that are not the result of the insertion of foreign DNA,” the policy categorically ignores many scientific studies that have found unintentional on-target and off-target mutations in the genome of gene edited organisms, and even foreign DNA that was inadvertently integrated during the “editing” process. In addition it proposes a “Voluntary Transparency Initiative” that would encourage companies to inform the government about any unregulated GMOs that they intend to commercialize. This is anti-transparency, as the word “Voluntary” means that negligent corporations can easily put new products on the market without notifying the public.
This is not just a Canadian issue. Bayer Crop Science is pressuring the European Union to exclude gene editing from GMO regulations. Greenpeace EU is warning about the dangers of allowing this, demanding that the government ignore the lobbying and protect biodiversity.
Admittedly the current approval process is not an exemplary one. Environmental regulators already have a well documented history of agency capture, and are not committed to the gold standard of safety science. Incredibly, they do not even conduct their own studies - instead relying on industry data that is likely biased. Yet the idea of giving industry the exclusive authority to assess the safety of their products is still more reckless, potentially allowing a wave of new GMOs that no one is aware of. There are many views about the risks and benefits of genetic engineering. Some will say that they are necessary to adapt to climate breakdown. Many, including Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki, absolutely decry the use of GMOs. However, the fundamental issue at stake remains true despite these scientific differences: corporate self-regulation is unacceptable and dangerous.
The new guidelines would also weaken safety assessments for GMOs that are similar to those previously approved by Health Canada. If this is allowed to continue, where could it lead? Imagine if the Ministry of the Environment said it will now remove regulations for pipeline projects. Most will agree that giving Chevron power to assess the safety of new oil wells is unthinkable and foolish. Chevron’s defamation campaign against human rights attorney Stephen Donziger is clear proof. The same standard must be applied to all profit-driven institutions.
At the root of Health Canada’s propaganda is the fallacious concept of corporate social responsibility, which the political establishment is increasingly eager to promote. As described in Joel Bakan’s The New Corporation, the aim of the wealthy elite, led by the World Economic Forum, is to restructure public opinion and create acceptance for a world where corporations are the “compassionate” guardians of society.
Acquiescence to this strategy is not an option. It is a road to ruin, and the end of democracy. It is no accident that the many billionaires and business leaders who profess this new doctrine - such as Jeff Bezos, Klaus Schwab, and Bill Gates - are the same “philanthropists” who are attempting to monopolize the food supply. While they claim to care about the environment, income inequality, and racial justice, their actions indicate their true mission.
There is still hope for the future ahead. Many small farmers around the world are leading the charge to create a regenerative farming revolution that can produce nutritious food and sequester carbon into the soil. There is growing awareness about the destructive impacts of the industrial food system. Unfortunately, big agribusiness is attempting to co-opt the regenerative organic movement by peddling false claims that gene editing technology is essential to combat climate change and implement a Green New Deal. Strategically, this is part of a larger campaign that casts technology as the wonder-fix for the accelerating climate crisis, rather than nature-based solutions that harness the earth’s intelligence to create true sustainability and ecological harmony. This type of marketing, employed by Bill Gates and others, must be rejected before it gains any more ground.
Republished from aidanrandall.substack.com
Aidan Randall is a youth activist and journalist based in Grey Bruce, Ontario. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram @AidansAction.
