|
AUS – GM CROPS NOTHING NEW LEGALLY
GM crops raise no new issues for Australian farmers
24 October 2005. Source: Avcare Media Release
www.avcare.org.au
A report into segregation and liability issues for genetically modified (GM) crops in Australia has found current farming systems, commercial contracts and the common law can adequately accommodate the technology.
Further, it finds there is no need to establish new laws, the introduction of strict liability is unwarranted and Government intervention in relation to liability and GM crops is unnecessary.
The report was prepared for Avcare by economics and policy consulting firm ACIL Tasman.
“There are no new or hidden liability issues,” said Mark Barber, the author of the report. “Farmers face no greater risk than they do now when delivering grain to meet specific segregations for specific markets,”
The paper finds that once the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator has approved the human health and environmental safety of a GM crop, farmers and the supply chain can use long-established informal and legal conventions to manage liability issues should they arise.
“Common practice among Australian farmers, and common law, gives both GM crop farmers and farmers who choose to grow conventional or organic crops, protection of their rights and the ability to seek compensation if there is economic loss,” Mr Barber said.
“As with any liability issue, a farmer would need to prove economic loss in order to seek redress”.
“If the loss of a price premium due to the unintended presence of trace levels of GM material can be proven, a conventional or organic grower may have a case to seek redress.
“To date, numerous market studies have found that there are few, if any, price premiums for conventional canola over GM canola.”
“If this market situation were to change, the current Australian system could adapt accordingly.
Mr Barber said “the debate over GM crops has been largely emotive rather than based on realistic scenarios and scientific and economic fact.”
“But a rational analysis of both the economic incentives for farmers to meet contract specifications, and the common practices of good neighbourliness in Australian farming communities, suggests there will be few problems. If any problems do arise, adequate systems are in place to handle them,” Mr Barber said.
The report found farmers’ property rights - the rights to conduct their faming business, are established and managed by a hierarchy of mechanisms:
- Informal norms and good neighbourliness based on the reality of the need to work together and live in the same community.
- Industry self-regulation through established grain standards and commercial contracts.
- Under common law, where if economic loss is proved, a court can award recompense.
|
