May 9, 2000 / Council of Candians Press Release
OTTAWA -- The Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy (CIELAP),
Council of Canadians, Professor E. Ann Clark of the University of Guelph
and Professor Bert Christie of the University of Prince Edward Island,
represented by the Sierra Legal Defence Fund, today filed a petition under
the Auditor General Act against the federal government for failing to
protect public health and the environment in regulating genetically modified
organisms (GMOs). Under the Act, the government is required to respond to
the challenge within 120 days.
The petition requests a review of all federal laws and regulations governing
genetically modified foods, animals, fish, trees, insects and animal feed.
The petitioners charge that the current regime is inadequate to protect
public health and the environment, fails to meet Canada's international
environmental obligations to protect biological diversity, and is
inconsistent with the principles of sustainable development.
"The current regime is constructed on a foundation of inadequate legislation
and regulations, deficient science, and institutionalized conflict of
interest. It is simply not good enough to protect the health and environment
of Canadians. Fundamental reform is required" said Dr. Mark Winfield,
Director of Research with the Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and
Policy.
"The existing framework was not created to deal with the multitude of human
health, environmental, social and ethical problems cropping up, because
these issues are new and unique to GMOs, said Melanie Steiner, project
lawyer with Sierra Legal Defence Fund. We are asking the federal government
to address these issues and to promulgate laws that are more protective and
comprehensive."
Under the Auditor General Act, a petition can be filed about environmental
matters. The Auditor General is obliged to forward the petition to the
responsible federal department within fifteen days of the date on which it
is received. After considering the petition, the appropriate Ministers
(including Health Canada and Environment Canada) are under a duty to
respond.
"It is unbelievable that common food additives such as sweeteners have to be
labelled, but foods that are being tampered with at the genetic level do
not," said Jennifer Story, Health Protection Campaigner for the Council of
Canadians. "Consumers are paying the price by being denied the right to
choose what they want to eat."
But it is not just the lack of labelling that is problematic; the entire
risk assessment process for GMOs is flawed. "The government has chosen to
rush products to market prematurely without ensuring their safety," said Dr.
E. Ann Clark. "There is no way that the government in good conscience can
say that it is protecting the health of its citizens and the environment."
Furthermore, "the federal risk assessment process is based entirely on data
provided by industry, like big seed companies. This lack of independent
government testing is a serious abdication of public responsibility," added
Dr. Bert Christie.
The citizens' petition requests that the relevant federal departments: enact
new legislation specifically to deal with GMOs; remove all institutional
conflicts of interest; undertake rigorous, thorough, independent and
transparent assessments of GMOs before they are allowed to enter the
marketplace; and provide mandatory labelling of foods derived from GMOs. The
government must respond to the Petition by September 4, 2000.
(posted without permission)
