Update on today’s Bill C-474 debate… comments and outcomes….

As of today’s debate, Bill C-474 was not referred to Committee. Instead the Conservatives delayed action. There will be another hour of debate in April or sooner. The Conservative Party spoke against the Bill. The Liberal Party mostly spoke against the Bill but left the door open to a debate in Committee…

Quotes of note:

“We have a dominant position in the world in GMOs and so it is important that we consider our future…” Andre Bellavance, Bloc 

“The content and ramifications of the Bill are complex. The wording is problematic. The Member Atamanenko has stated that the Bill was developed in response to the Flax contamination issue. The EU – 70% of our flax export market – was closed due to contamination…if this Bill had been the law at the time, and the study of impact on the market for flax would the knowledge have stopped GE flax and prevented market disruptions?….The Bill does not describe what “market” or “harm” means, we look forward to more debate in the House and maybe debate in Committee.” Francis Valeriote, Liberal, on Agriculture Committee

“This Bill raises the question of how best to manage the market impacts. But we need a process based on sound science. The Canola Growers Association warned to keep the politics out of the decisions. There are technical flaws in the Bill also.” Pierre Lemieux for the Minister of Agriculture, Gerry Ritz

“We need to be very cautious about including any non-scientific issues like public attitudes – this has to be resolved by industry, not government. GMOs have been around for 50 years and are important.” Larry Miller, Conservative, Agriculture Committee Chair

2 thoughts on “Update on today’s Bill C-474 debate… comments and outcomes….

  1. This is such an important Bill. Why are the Liberals being so thick headed? The Flax growers have already lost millions. GMOs are not helping anyone but big industry.

  2. Although I haven’t read the Bill in full, I get the sense that the bottleneck here has more to do with HOW it is written… in other words, there needs to be some clarification on terms and concepts before there will be further movement / consideration from any of the parties. Thanks for the response, Arzeena. It will be interesting to see how things transpire.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s