A WEST Wimmera canola producer and anti-GM campaigner has said he is struggling to find an answer to his questions regarding delivery of non-GM canola into the bulk system.
Geoff Carracher, Victorian spokesman for the Network of Concerned Farmers (NCF) said questions surrounding potential contamination of non-GM canola delivered to the bulk system had not been answered specifically by either the bulk handler, GrainCorp, the industry peak body, the Australian Oilseeds Federation (AOF) or the GM patent holder, Monsanto.
Mr Carracher said his major worries were two-fold, and related to grain marketing, and payment of end point royalties:
• Given the price premium of around $10-15/t for non-GM canola, he asked where he could seek compensation if he could not deliver his canola into the non-GM segregation.
• Following up from the famous Schmeiser Case in Canada, he asked whether he would be liable to pay end point royalties to Monsanto should his canola contain a small amount of GM material.
GrainCorp corporate affairs manager David Ginns said his company’s role was in providing segregations for GM and non-GM canola and did not extend to stewardship.
“Any questions the public have about the stewardship of RR canola should be directed toward either Monsanto and/or the Australian Oilseeds Federation,” he said.
Mr Carracher said he believed GrainCorp needed to answer questions specific to the delivery of canola that would impact farmers using the bulk handling network and said farmers needed clarity on the issue.
On the issue of segregation, AOF executive director Nick Goddard said that, contrary to Mr Carracher’s view, the industry could ensure the two segregations remained contamination-free.
“When the industry said it could deliver non-GM canola throughout the supply chain, it can, in fact, do that,” he said.
On the issue of end point royalties, Mr Carracher said he had written to Monsanto regarding what level of GM contamination was required before the company claimed its EPR payments out of the deliveries.
Monsanto said yesterday it had just completed a response to Mr Carracher’s concerns.
Monsanto spokesperson Honi McNaughton said the company would not be levying payments off deliveries with trace amounts of GM material.
“It has never been, nor will it be, Monsanto policy to exercise its patent rights where trace amounts of our patented traits are present in a farmer's paddock or grain as a result of inadvertent means,” she said.
“If a circumstance such as this is brought to Monsanto’s attention, we will work with the parties involved to investigate the cause.
“Monsanto only protects its intellectual property in situations where we believe there has been a knowing and deliberate violation.
Mr Carracher, however, said he was concerned it appeared the grain industry was accepting GM contamination but refusing to outline the difficult conditions and consequences for non-GM farmers.
He was concerned that there would be no way to market his grain as GM-free due to contamination, and accused the government and state farmer organisations of putting big business ahead of growers.
The lack of clarity meant he was apprehensive about marketing his canola this year.
“We are left with the problem of all delivering our canola, not knowing if we have contamination or if we can fill our signed non-GM contracts, if we will lose our market or be paid less.
“We may even be fined or charged user fees for the contamination we could not avoid."
Email a friend