OTTAWA--Third World countries pleaded yesterday with Canada and the United States to label the genetically
modified foods they export, saying they won't be able to cope if the foods prove dangerous. Noting that
many scientists are worried that the human food supply could be contaminated by the proliferation of
genetically modified crops, Nigeria asked a United Nations body meeting in Ottawa yesterday to introduce
strict labelling rules quickly.
If it ever turns out that GM foods do present a health hazard, African nations will be hardest
hit, Nigerian delegate Tseaa Shambe told the UN Codex Alimentarius (Latin for food labelling) conference.
"We in Africa have got poor hospitals," he said. "We plead with the Codex committee to take this
issue [GM food-labelling] seriously."
Other developing nations, particularly India, echoed Nigeria's impassioned push for comprehensive,
mandatory labelling of all GM foods. However, nations that produce such foods -- notably Canada, the
United States and Argentina -- stalled progress toward an cut off the labelling debate early in the
afternoon, promising a longer debate at the next meeting, a year from now in Halifax. This year's
conference began on Tuesday and runs until tomorrow, but yesterday was the only opportunity to debate
the labelling of GM foods.
Progress on the issue has been incremental since the mid-1990s.
Canada, the United States and Argentina, who produce the vast majority of the world's genetically
modified commercial crops, disagree with the idea that foods should be labelled simply because they
were genetically modified, arguing that labels are necessary only if the foods pose a proven risk.
Canada has a voluntary labelling scheme, allowing companies to decide for themselves whether to tell
consumers the product has been altered. However, a recent poll by Pollara Inc. and Earnscliffe Research
and Communications found that 94 per cent of Canadians believe the government should order companies
to label GM products.
Yesterday, Canada and the United States successfully pushed to add the term "modern biotechnology"
to the list of possible labels under a future international agreement. Greenpeace Canada campaigner
Holly Penfound slammed the move as an attempt to confuse consumers who are wary of foods that have
been genetically modified. "It's just another attempt to water down labels so they won't be meaningful
to the consumer."
Canada and the United States were also successful in adding the words "fairer practices in food
trade" to the list of objectives, a move that some fear will ensure that the World Trade Organization
becomes final arbiter of disputes regarding labelling of GM foods.
Just before debate was cut off, the Dutch delegation slammed the slow-moving Codex process, saying
the body should be "more ambitious," and focus not on trade considerations, but consumer needs.