Subject: Terminator Technology will not solve the problem it is
intended to address de
A warm embrace to many recent new-comers to our network, from all
of us!
And many, many thanks for the insights and input others of you
have provided. It is woven into the information base and gave me the
conviction to, as Zeb recommended, "use the phone
more"!
UPDATE:
Monday, March 14 I talked by telephone with Bob
McLean, head of the Canadian delegation to the United Nations meetings on
Terminator Technology in Brazil that start next week (March 20).
We
had a good talk. I won't go into the arguments I presented in
the conversation and the counter-arguments.
I did not say, but I
understand that there is only so much that can be done by one person in the
system. Bob can do his work to the best of his ability, but we have to
do our part, if there is to be a satisfactory outcome on Terminator
Technology - herbicide-tolerant seeds with another design feature
added: they're now sterile, too. (This is the path our
food supply is taking.)
This morning I sent the letter below to ALL
the parties who have played a role in terminator technology, for the purpose
of bringing them together in effective problem-solving. The letter
places terminator technology in context. When you understand what has
happened, you better understand "their" perceived need to proceed with
terminator technology, and you can see that "they" think they are acting in
our best interests. That has to be unveiled. Terminator is not in
the public interest. The problem is the development of
herbicide-tolerant seeds. If we stop the development of those seeds,
there is no need for terminator technology and whatever ghoulish inventions
will be necessary to deal with the unforeseen problems created by
it.
Hopefully the letter and attachment will provide newcomers with
enough background to understand what is going on. Terminator
Technology, if allowed to proceed, will further entrench governance that
serves transnational corporate interests. There are severe implications
for our health (the food supply) and for the environment.
In my
mind, the best people to lobby are: (the complete list of people I sent
information to is at bottom. You may wish to pick up others from that
list.)
Effective messages are short (unlike mine!). Something
like:
"Terminator Technology is taking us further down a wrong
pathway. Please support the United Nations Moratorium on terminator
technology. And remove all licensing for these seeds in Canada.
Herbicide-tolerant seeds are the problem to be addressed. The licensing
of these seeds needs to be stopped."
Your participation brings no results
if I don't join my hand to yours. My letter will bear no fruit, if
others don't join their hand to mine. Together we are
powerful.
Cheers! Sandra ====================================== LETTER
SENT: WEDNESDAY, MARCH 15 AM: ---------
SENT TO: list at
bottom
PURPOSE OF COMMUNICATION: To connect people who have
responsibilities for terminator technology for the purpose of
problem-solving.
The office of Chuck Strahl, Minister of Agriculture is
the most obvious candidate to co-ordinate the
problem-solving.
Dear All,
(1) I understand that the
Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), Dept of Agriculture, has
already licensed terminator seeds.
Request: François Guimont (613
225-2342), President of the CFIA, responsible for the licensing of crops:
will you please confirm this with me?
-------
(2) RE:
Government of Canada negotiating Terminator Technology UN Meetings start next
week, March 20, Brazil (Bob McLean, Dept of Environment, is Head of the
Canadian Delegation)
INPUT TO PARTIES:
Terminator Technology
was a response, the wrong response, to a mistake made by credentialed,
influential authorities and the Governments - public investment in
herbicide tolerant crops. The
chemical/pharmaceutical/biotech corporations are also paying dearly as angry
farmers demand they come and pull the plants (weeds) that are resistant to
chemicals, out of their fields. The public is screaming.
Rather
than admit the mistake and back out, another gene manipulation
is being made to try and correct the problem: the seeds designed to
be tolerant of chemical applications now also carry a "suicide"
trait.
The re-design is supposed to correct the earlier design which
quickly spread and became a pollutant that is very costly to control - not to
mention that citizens are not anxious to have a food supply developed
according to the criteria that it be resistant to chemicals (and now it has
also to be sterile). ... Our Governments and Universities invested in
the development of herbicide-tolerant seeds. They're in a hole; instead
of climbing out, they are digging in deeper (We have a Problem? ...
well then, we'll make the seeds sterile! Ha! Aren't we
brilliant!).
"Correct" responses address the actual problem.
Inappropriate responses to problems are band-aids that temporarily cover over
the problem. Under the band-aid, the wound festers and grows
larger.
Terminator Technology is a wrong response to the pollution caused
by herbicide-tolerant crops:
- It will not arrest the
development and licensing of seeds designed to be tolerant of herbicide
applications. Alfalfa, grasses, lentils, wheat, canola ... the list of
herbicide-tolerant plants developed, licensed, in use and waiting to be
introduced is long.
- Nor does Terminator Technology address the
problem that due to partnerships between the corporations, the Government,
and the Universities, we are totally without effective regulation (protection
of the commons). Seeds are a vital part of the commons, to be carefully
guarded and protected to serve the public interest. With seed
development, we have completely lost that function in the Canadian
democracy. The Government is a collaborator in serving corporate
interests, to the detriment of the public interest.
And then there are
the fish (Canadian) that have had growth genes from other species inserted
into them, and the pigs (American) with growth genes from human beings.
The fish grow to 6 times the size of normal fish within a year's time.
Government regulation? Aaah! but these fish, too, are designed to
be sterile. "Life Running Out of Control" by
German documentary-maker Bertram Verhaag, who I met while he was in
Saskatchewan collecting the footage on our experience with gene-altered
canola, is an excellent source of information - I recommend it to you.
I myself, might have titled the documentary "Man playing God".
This is
our food supply, guys. And always it comes back to the
fundamental question: in whose interests?
The industry
propaganda extols the virtues of seeds that are resistant to chemicals.
And now the virtue of chemical-resistant, sterile seeds.
The irrefutable evidence is that herbicide-tolerant seeds lead to higher
levels of chemical use. A simple person can figure it out: more
and more plants are resistant to glyphosate (roundup). You can kill off
unwanted plants with an application of glyphosate, but there has to be a
follow-up application of 2,4-D to kill the resistant plants. Is
terminator technology the solution?
Terminator Technology is a classic
example of the functioning of dynamic systems. You have a system that
is out-of-balance (use herbicide-tolerant canola to illustrate). In
order to bring canola back to equilibrium, as with any dynamic system, you
have to: a. respond to the feedback that something is wrong by taking
the APPROPRIATE corrective action to bring the system back to
equilibrium, and b. do it "in time".
If you fail on either
account, the system falls into further disintegration and eventual
collapse. The classic case used to illustrate this by Jane Jacobs is
the Atlantic cod fishery: the feedback was declining catches. The
response was more money which both maintained and attracted more people to
the fishery, which allowed bigger vessels that could go further to sea. It
was the wrong response to the feedback; the cod fishery collapsed,
with severe repercussions. The last time I checked, a number of years
ago, the collapse was permanent. That is characteristic of dynamic
systems: once they go past a certain level of disintegration, they are
not retrievable.
Seeds are the basis of our food supply. First the
seeds were engineered so they can be sprayed with chemicals and
survive. Now those seeds have another modification to make them
sterile. Meanwhile the production of herbicide-tolerant plants moves
forward - more and more of them are released into the environment. The
base problem is not addressed. And in whose interests?
Much of
the nutrient value is in the germ of a seed; sterile seeds
mean what?
People buy wheat germ to add to their breakfast cereal to
compensate for nutrients removed in the milling process (cereal typically has
the wheat germ removed to increase the shelf life of the product. The "germ"
of the seed will go rancid if not refrigerated.)
What has happened to
the germ of the seed, if the seed is sterile? The health of the
population is dependent upon the quality of the available foods.
Do
sterile seeds produce pollen?
The problem with answering the question is
that most of the research has transnational corporate interest behind it.
They expected people to believe the silly things about herbicide tolerant
seeds (they can "co-exist" in nature). Such lies have been held forth until
they became untenable in an informed and guffawing public. Public
trust in "the science" and the reassurances have been
completely undermined. ... The corporations and their
collaborators....
I ask you to put your heads together. Back out of
the hole. Terminator Technology will not correct the actual problems
because in no way does it address the problems. We are on the wrong
path. Your reputations will be saved if you have the courage to
acknowledge and address the problem. I challenge you to find the
APPROPRIATE response in a TIMELY fashion.
Many of you have inherited the
dilemma from your predecessors. You don't have face to save. You
are in a position to assert the public interest.
The CFIA, Department of
Agriculture should withdraw all licensing of seeds that have been designed to
be resistant to chemical applications and all seeds that have built-in
Terminator Technology, also known as - Technology Protection System
(TPS) - "Suicide seeds" - genetic seed sterilisation technology
(GSST) - GURTS, Genetic Use Restriction Technologies.
That will
address the root of the problem. Also, the Patent Act needs to
be updated. It applies to mechanical devices. It was never
intended for application to life forms. To subscribe to the idea that a
person or a corporation can legitimately claim ownership over life forms is
nuts.
----------
The United Nations negotiations on Terminator
Technology are through - the Department of the Environment.
But the
people and institutions behind terminator technology are - the Departments of
Agriculture and - Health, - the universities where the biotechnology
research is being carried out through partnerships between the Government,
the Universities and - the corrupt chemical/pharmaceutical/biotech complex of
companies.
(I have a long list from the public record of the court
convictions, etc. against these corporations if people question the choice of
words, "corrupt".)
I am sending this communication to many of the
people/institutions that have played a role along the path that led to
terminator technology. (recipients are listed below.) We all
share responsibility for arriving at this place.
It is unfair to target
the Department of Environment over Terminator Technology. It is a
shared responsibility. May we all do our part. This is
mine.
Thanks.
Sandra Finley
------------
TO: Bob
McLean Dept of Environment Head of the Canadian Delegation negotiating
Terminator Technology UN Meetings next week, start March 20, Brazil (819)
997-1303; Robert.Mclean@ec.gc.ca; (Bob was
also head of delegation at the Bangkok round of negotiations)
John
Karau Dept of Environment (John was head at the round of negotiations in
Spain.) Biodiversity Convention office john.karau@ec.gc.ca; Phone
819-953-9669
Rona Ambrose Minister Responsible for Dept
Environment Edmonton-Spruce Grove (Alberta) (819) 997-1441; Rona.Ambrose@ec.gc.ca;
Deputy
Minister, Dept Environment (Justice Gomery recommended that deputy ministers
bear more responsibility for their actions. Hence their inclusion in
this communication.)
Mark Warawa Parliamentary Secretary,
Environment Langley, BC tel: 604-534-5955; markwarawa@shaw.ca;
-------
NOTE:
I have asked the University of Saskatchewan to re-visit its partnerships with
corporations, because of the corruption they create. My case is well
documented, from external sources and from personal experience. My submission
to the Board of Governors is attached.
Parliamentary
Secretary to Chuck Strahl David L. Anderson, from Frontier,
Saskatchewan Cypress Hills - Grasslands 613) 992-0657; (306) 778-4480; anderda@parl.gc.ca; david.anderson1@sasktel.net;
Leonard
Edwards, Deputy Minister Agriculture edwardslj@agr.gc.ca; (613)
759-1101
the United Nations moratorium on Terminator c/o Dr. Tewolde
(Tewolde Berhan Gebre Egziabher, Ethiopia) African biosafety negotiator esid@ethionet.et;
Dr. Hamdallah Zedan,
Executive Secretary of the CBD Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety secretariat@biodiv.org;
My
Member of Parliament (The University of Saskatchewan is also in his
riding) Brad Trost Saskatoon Humboldt Saskatoon Constituency Office:
(306) 975-6133 The Hill email address: trostb@parl.gc.ca; Local email address:
brad.trost@sasktel.net;
----------------------- UN
Meeting in Brazil (20-31 March 2006) on Terminator Technology.
This matter requires prompt attention.
Best wishes, Sandra
Finley =================== FROM: Sandra Finley Saskatoon, SK S7N
0L1 306-373-8078 sabest1@sasktel.net