 |
GM debate continues
PAULA Fitzgerald, from Agrifood Awareness, claims that current Australian laws governing the labelling of GM food deliver choice to people (The Murray Pioneer, August 29).
They don't, because only foods containing GM protein will be labelled.
The lack of any requirement for oils and sugars from GM crops to be labelled means the public is deprived of informed choice.
When giving permission for GM canola to be grown in NSW and Victoria, state governments claimed that the GM crops could be kept separate from regular canola.
This means that any company using canola oil can find out if it is genetically modified or not.
The supplier knows and can inform the company. As someone trained in science, I don't have a problem with any technology.
I am no luddite and I can see that genetic modification could have some advantages.
However, along with many colleagues, I do not consider that appropriate and sufficiently independent testing of currently available GM crops has been done.
Until all long-term human and environmental impacts are fully understood, those of us working in public health want full labelling of all GM foods.
No labelling has occurred in the United States and so we are unable to say whether claims that some health problems are due to these crops are true or not.
Why is the GM industry so afraid of labelling?
Dr ROSEMARY STANTON
Kangaroo Valley, NSW 
Labelling the key
MOST FOODS made using gene manipulation (GM) technology are unlabelled as such, though 93 per cent of Australians want labelling.
Labels would allow us a real choice of what to feed our families.
Agrifood Awareness (The Murray Pioneer, August 29) opposes full GM labelling.
This serves their sponsors' interests.
GM vegetable oils, starches and sugars refined from GM soybean, corn, canola and cottonseed are in many processed foods.
Cottonseed oil is also used in some fast food shops. None are labelled, on the risky assumption - not fact - that all GM protein and DNA is removed from these ingredients by processing.
Even highly refined peanut oil may still provoke life-threatening allergic reactions, so care and labelling are essential.
Also exempt from labels, for the same shaky reason, are the meat, milk, eggs and honey from animals fed GM feed; restaurant meals; colourings; additives; and processing aids.
Yet new Italian research found foreign DNA in cows milk and meat from animal clones may soon be sold here, untested and unlabelled.
If GM foods are as nutritious, safe and acceptable as Agrifood claims, their corporate clients should be happy to tell the truth, on labels.
Health ministers should require the labelling of all food made using GM. Nothing less will satisfy us.
BOB PHELPS
Executive director
Gene Ethic
Nelson casting stones
OPPOSITION leader Dr Brendan Nelson whinges about inadequate teacher training.
He labels university education departments "quasi-sociology departments" and bemoans the inadequate requirements for entry into and graduation from teaching program.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Dr Nelson the Minister for Education, Science, and Training from November 26, 2001, to January 27, 2006?
For more than four years, didn't Dr Nelson have responsibility for these self-same requirements about which he's now abusing the government?
Was he not in the position to make the improvements then/there for which he so casually castigates the Rudd Government?
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
JUDY BAMBERGER
O'Connor ACT
The big AFL question
HEY NICK, I was wondering since your team is not playing finals, who's going to win out of Collingwood and Adelaide this week?
CON DOUPIS
Barmera
Well done SAMI
WELL DONE Tim Whetstone and the SAMI directors on their proposal to Senator Wong on a water buyback plan.
Let's hope that some commonsense will prevail and Senator Wong takes notice so those irrigators wishing to exit their respective industries can do so as soon as possible.
ROGER M. EDMONDS
Paringa
Wong ignoring SA
MINISTER Penny Wong is deliberately ignoring the plight of South Australians.
Despite being a Senator for South Australia, Minister Wong refuses to disclose the advice that she has received on the urgent action which can be taken in relation to the Lower Lakes.
In June of this year, Minister Wong asked for urgent advice from her department. She now refuses to release that advice and has turned her back on people of the Lower Lakes.
It is not the first time that Ms Wong has ignored rural and regional South Australians.
On December 6, 2007, nine months ago, I wrote to Minister Wong asking her about a federal grant to support the Murray Bridge Golf Club, which is looking to install an innovative aquifer storage and recovery system because of severe water shortages.
My office has called Ms Wong twice since then, seeking her response, however nothing has been heard.
Nine months is time enough for a response.
In February of this year I wrote to Minister Wong about an idea from another constituent to offer businesses a subsidy to convert to solar energy, as is available to some households.
Despite calling Ms Wong's office, no response has been heard for seven months now.
My constituents are entitled to receive a response from the minister about their renewable energy and water conservation ideas.
She is a Senator for the whole of South Australia and has an obligation to respond to rural and regional South Australians.
In the past, the Howard Government strongly supported rural communities with funding of innovative projects in water conservation and renewable energy. These programs have been abolished by Labor.
Minister Wong is very good at hiding.
She refuses to tell the Australian public about the urgent advice she has received for the Lower Lakes and she refuses to deal with rural and regional Australians in her own state of South Australia on critical issues.
PATRICK SECKER
Member for Barker
|
