Sandra Finley

17. Ballantyne

 X Ballantyne  No Responses »
Jun 132013
 

Record of Laliberte meeting with Prisciak, February,  2013 

Karen Prisciak: 

The Law Society (L.S.) should be on its way doing their job.

Don’t know where they will be going.  Three options:

  1. Might just let it go
  2. Go to disciplinary action
  3. Send it to a higher level

Karen will call George by the end of March (one of the L.S. team working on this is on holiday).

George Laliberte (306-979-9315) told Karen:

He expected the kind of answer made by Hesje.

Is glad that Hesje assumed responsibility.

But everything is as before.

 

George told Karen his belief that people in the justice system know how to cover each other up.  He has no faith in the justice system.

 

“If I had been there, I don’t think it would have gone the way it did.  I was not there to represent myself.”

They said they couldn’t contact me.

They didn’t WANT to contact me.  Didn’t want me there.

The Star Phoenix was able to contact me with no problem.

 

Re  Hesje’s answer:  he is forgetting what this is all about.  He says I was their client but I was not.

 

After the meeting with Vellacott I did not hear anything from Hesje.

I thought it was Done, gone, done with.

They were not representing me.

(George had never hired the services of McKercher.  The Liberal Party was “looking after it”.)

Six years later I hear about a judgment against me.

George asked Karen if he needed a lawyer (regarding the L.S.).

Karen:

No, I am representing you.

The L.S. has taken charge.

I am working for  them.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

(George, a question concerning  “Doesn’t address Liberals.”  (Hesje’s answer)  do you recall, was that something that you mentioned in your conversation with Karen?  Not sure.)

2013-06-13 Food Safety Alert, Subverting Democracy, Passing GMO Labeling Laws, and More on the Farm Bill

 Food, Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category), Genetically Modified, Health, Trade Deals, PPPs, Integration Canada-U.S.  No Responses »
Jun 132013
 

Please go to the URL.  http://www.organicconsumers.org/   I don’t have time to fix the formatting in the copy that follows the large blank space:
                                                                                                                                                                                            

ESSAY OF THE WEEK

Consumer Alert: Secret Trade Agreements Threaten Food Safety,         Subvert Democracy

If you think the         U.S. government is doing a sub-par job of keeping your food safe, brace         yourself. You could soon be eating imported chicken, beef and seafood         products that don’t meet even basic U.S. standards for food safety. The         Obama Administration is allowing corporations like Dow AgroSciences,         Cargill and DuPont, and industry trade groups like the Pork Producers         Council and Tobacco Associates, Inc. – 600 of them in all – to weigh in         on negotiations on two of the largest free trade agreements in world         history.

Who doesn’t get a         seat at the table? Consumers, farmers, even members of Congress. In         fact, the President wants to “fast-track” the two agreements. That         means Congress will be forced to vote on them, after they’ve already         been finalized and signed, without benefit of the normal democratic         checks and balances that include debate and the ability to introduce         amendments.

The Trans-Atlantic         Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and Trans-Pacific Partnership         (TPP) pose direct threats to consumer safety. They will weaken U.S. and         world food safety standards, threaten domestic and international food         sovereignty laws, and allow transnational corporations to sue         governments for alleged future lost profits unless the corporations are         allowed to freely peddle their unproven, unsafe goods with reckless         regard for existing food safety laws.

Read the essay

Read the press release

TAKE ACTION: Tell President Obama and Interim U.S. Trade         Rep. Miriam Sapiro: Trade Agreements Shouldn’t Be Secret!

GMO LEGISLATION UPDATE

Winning! Connecticut and Maine Make History, Pass GMO Labeling Laws

It’s Monsanto’s         worst nightmare come true. One by one, states are passing GMO labeling         laws, despite Monsanto’s best efforts – and deep pockets – to prevent         them. Will the Biotech Bully follow through on its threats to sue? We         say: Bring it on!

Kudos to the         hard-working, take-no-prisoners, not-takin’-no-for-an-answer activists         in Connecticut for scoring the first GMO labeling law in the country.         And a tip of the hat to Connecticut Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, who has         promised to sign the Connecticut bill, lawsuit threats and all. The         Connecticut bill received bipartisan support, passing the Senate         unanimously and winning a 134-3 vote in the House. Maine followed         Connecticut’s lead, with the House passing LD 718 yesterday, June 12,         also by an overwhelming majority vote 141-4.

Neither bill is perfect. Connecticut’s requires four other states,         including one that borders the Constitution State, to pass GMO labeling         laws before it kicks in. Maine contains a similar trigger, but requires         five other states to pass GMO labeling laws, before LD 718 can take         effect. But it just could turn out that the trigger clauses prompt         other nearby states, including Vermont whose bill H.112 will be taken         up in January, to follow suit.

Next it’s on to Washington State, where voters will cast their ballots         on Nov. 5, to decide on I-522, a citizens’ ballot initiative to require         mandatory GMO labeling there.

More on the Connecticut win

More on the Maine win

SUPPORT THE OCA & OCF

Usual Suspects Strike Again

We knew they’d         show up, sooner or later, with their bulging wallets. Can their fake         science, sleazy ads and bogus voter guides be far behind?

This week, the         money started flowing in to the campaign to defeat I-522, Washington         State’s ballot initiative to label genetically modified organisms         (GMOs). If history is our guide, this is just the beginning. A mere         trickle compared with the flood that’s sure to follow.

The Grocery Manufacturers Association is leading the way, with its         first donation, $472.5k. Monsanto has plunked down $242.2k so far, a         mere pittance compared to the nearly $8 million the biotech giant         forked out last year to defeat Proposition 37, California’s GMO         labeling initiative. The other usual suspects include DuPont Pioneer,         Bayer CropScience, Dow AgroSciences – you know, the guys who make all         those nasty pesticides, and don’t want you to know they’re putting them         in your food.

Experts tell us         that neither side in the I-522 fight will need to spend as much as they         spent in California. We can reach far more voters, with far fewer ads,         in Washington. The opposition could spend the same amount it spent in         California, nearly $46 million, to try to defeat I-522, but you can         only saturate a market so much before you put off voters. That said, we         know these early donations will be followed by many more, much larger         ones.

The biotech         industry will pull out all the stops to defeat I-522, especially in         light of the recent GMO labeling law wins in Connecticut and Maine. We         don’t have any huge corporations on our side in this fight. But we have         you. Hundreds of thousands of individual donors who, together, can make         a huge difference. Please make a generous donation today. Thank you!

Donate to the Organic Consumers Fund         (non-tax-deductible,         but necessary for our legislative efforts in Washington, Vermont and         other states)

If you need your         donation to be tax-deductible, you can donate to the Organic Consumers Association         (tax-deductible,         helps support our work on behalf of organic standards, fair trade and public         education)

TRAITOR BOYCOTT

Dear Traitor Brands: We’re Waiting

It’s been more         than six months since consumers began boycotting the “Traitor” brands:         the organic and natural brands of the parent companies that spent millions         to defeat Proposition 37, the California Right to Know GMO labeling         initiative. When we launched the boycott, we explained that we’d be         happy to start buying brands like R.W. Knudsen, Naked Juice, Odwalla         and others again – just as soon as the decision-makers at those brands         guaranteed us that their parent companies wouldn’t pour money into         defeating future state labeling campaigns, but would instead pitch in         to support those campaigns.

We’re still         waiting. So far, there’s been no sign of donations from companies like         Pepsi, Coca-Cola, ConAgra, etc. to the NO campaign for I-522, a         citizens’ initiative to label GMOs in Washington State. That’s         encouraging. But there haven’t been any donations from those companies         to the YES campaign, either. Even though we know a lot of these Big         Food companies have signaled that they now support GMO labeling         laws, at least at the federal level.

If         you’re missing your Honest Tea or Boca Burgers or Hunts Organic, now         would be a good time to visit the facebook pages of all the Traitor Brands and post a little reminder:         You’ll become a loyal fan again, as soon as their parent companies         promise to support I-522. Until then, you’ll make do         with their competitors’ brands.
Download your wallet-sized boycott guide

Download a poster-sized boycott guide

Sign the boycott pledge

Order printed copies of the boycott guide or poster

FARM BILL UPDATE

Senator Promises Monsanto Protection Act Won’t Be Renewed without a         Vote

It pays to         complain. Thanks to your calls and letters to your U.S. Senators, the         movement to repeal the Monsanto Protection Act has scored a         preliminary victory: The much-maligned rider, slipped into the Farm         Bill without debate, will not be renewed without a vote. Sen. Debbie         Stabenow (D-Mich., pictured), chairwoman of the Agriculture Committee, pledged to oppose the extension beyond its         September 30 expiration date. Sen. Stabenow made the promise to Sen.         Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), who had pushed unsuccessfully for a vote on his         own amendment to repeal the Monsanto rider. Sen. Stabenow’s promise         represented a compromise.

Great news, but we         have to keep up the pressure to make sure Sen. Stabenow honors her         pledge. Please call and email your Senators and ask them to         pledge to vote against the Monsanto Protection Act if Sen. Blunt         proposes it again.

What’s next for         the Farm Bill? The Senate completed its work on June 10, passing the         legislation without voting on many of the other amendments we asked consumers to         support. The bill now moves to the House, where floor debates and votes         on amendments are scheduled for the week of June 17. The House version         of Farm Bill contains an amendment proposed by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa)         that would rob states of the right to regulate factory farms. That’s         bad enough, but the King Amendment is so broadly written that it could         also overturn hundreds of state laws regulating agricultural products,         including laws like the one Connecticut just passed, and many other         states are considering, that would require mandatory labeling of         genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

There’s         still time to make your voice heard on the King Amendment, and other         key amendments that will have an impact on food, environment and         climate change policies. Let Congress know where you stand!

Learn the fate of the Senate Farm Bill amendments and         find out what amendments will come up for a vote in the House

TAKE ACTION: Don’t Let Congress Stomp Out States’         Rights. Stop the King Amendment!

Love a Parade? March with Moms Across America on July 4!

The timing         couldn’t be more perfect. Just as we kicked off our plan to “out” the Senators who voted         against states’ rights to label GMOs, Moms Across America has organized         hundreds of marches in July 4 parades, to draw attention to kids’         health and GMOs. What better way to protest your Senators’ votes, than         by marching in a parade with thousands of moms fighting for their kids’         health?

The California         State Grange and LabelGMOs.org have teamed up with moms who have seen         their kids’ health improve by going GMO free. Together they’ve launched         the first Moms Across America campaign. Moms Across America is urging         everyone who supports “the freedom to choose our food” to         march in the hundreds of July 4 parades scheduled for the summer’s         biggest holiday. So far, activists in 147 towns have heeded the call.

Fourth of July         parades draw politicians and decision-makers of all stripes, and the 71 U.S. Senators who recently voted against         states’ rights to label GMOs are certain to be at an Independence Day         event somewhere in the their home state. Let’s make them and their         voting public aware that the nine out of 10 citizens who support GMO         labels aren’t happy with their votes against our right to know.

Find out if your Senators voted against your right to         know

Join Moms Across America on July 4

VIDEO OF THE WEEK

Cookin’ up Opposition to GMOs

“Its’ not about taste.         For me, it’s not even about the science. It’s about freedom.” Craft         Restaurants founder Tom Colicchio, known also for his work as the head         judge on Bravo’s hit competition show Top Chef, discusses what it means to         be a food activist.

Watch the video

LITTLE BYTES

Essential Reading for the Week

McDonald’s Cruelty: Creating Mentally Broken &         Physically Destroyed Animals

Why Are Children’s Foods Packed with Toxic Chemicals?

Modern Fruits and Vegetables Are Less Nutritious

Evidence of GMO Harm in Pig Study

If Dr. Offit Had His Way, Vitamins Would Be Treated as         Drugs

Hey, Non-GMO Activist: Monsanto’s CEO Thinks You’re an         Elitist

MESSAGE FROM OUR SPONSORS

Dr. Bronner’s Magic Pure Castile Classic Soaps

Unlike any you’ve ever used. A combination of organic extra virgin         coconut, olive, jojoba and hemp oils, together with pure essential         oils, creates a unique soap that cleans effectively without being         aggressive and produces a velvety-lather that leaves the skin         silky-smooth and refreshed.

Now available in         two new Magic liquid fragrances: Rose and Citrus Orange

 follow on         Twitter | friend on         Facebook | OCA on         Pinterest  | Donate

Please         forward this publication to family and friends, place it on web sites,
print it, duplicate it and post it freely. Knowledge is power!

Organic Bytes         is a publication of Organic Consumers Association

6771 South Silver Hill Drive – Finland, MN 55603 – Phone: 218-226-4164         – Fax: 218-353-7652

 

 

2013-06-11 CETA (also about GMO’s): Canada ready to raise threshold on foreign takeovers to $1.5B [and other give aways]

 Genetically Modified, Trade Deals, PPPs, Integration Canada-U.S.  No Responses »
Jun 122013
 

The Canadian Press update on CETA appears below.

What can we do about it?  is at the very bottom.

BACKGROUND, click on:

2011-02-08  CETA, plus Harper signs new security perimeter deal without consultation

CETA / GMO connection:  Scroll down (in preceding link) to heading  WHAT”S IT ALL ABOUT?  in order to understand that CETA is also about GMO food, through what it will do for “intellectual property rights”  (patented GMO seed).

         EXCERPTS, otherwise:

(CETA)   “not a trade agreement”, but as a “template to alter governance”.   

It is an “enclosure of what Government can do.”  They “no longer act for citizens.  Their function is to provide services for corporations.” 

European corporations are “interested in penetrating Canadian society down to the municipal level.”  (In CETA language,  “sub-national governments”).  All sub-national governments will be bound by CETA.  . . . “European corporations are interested in opening up Government procurement.”  They want access to hospitals, universities, etc.  Local suppliers cannot be favored.

 

If that’s not enough:

–        Whatever is given to Europeans in this trade agreement (CETA), is given also to the U.S. and Mexico (NAFTA).

–        The Government is simultaneously working on several trade agreements with various countries.

–        I wonder what will be left to give away to big money interests?

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =  =

 

Canada ready to raise threshold on foreign takeovers to $1.5B for Europe

 

The Canadian Press
Published Tuesday, June 11, 2013 1:57PM CST

 

OTTAWA — The Harper government has agreed to smooth the way for more takeovers of Canadian companies by European firms in one of several concessions during free-trade talks, sources tell The Canadian Press.

 

With Prime Minister Stephen Harper still hoping to sign a deal in principle while in Europe over the next several days, sources say Canadian negotiators have agreed to a provision to raise the threshold for reviewing foreign acquisitions from Europe to $1.5 billion.

 

All acquisitions under that value would not be subject to a government assessment about whether they create a net benefit for Canada.

 

The proposed change comes just after the House of Commons passed the budget implementation bill that raises the threshold for automatic review from the current $334 million to $1 billion over the next four years.

 

Intense talks, especially over the last few weeks, have brought the two sides together on several issues, the sources say.

 

Canada has significantly moved to appease European demands for opening up provincial energy utilities, particularly in Ontario and Quebec, for procurement of foreign goods and services.

 

On autos, rules-of-origin concerns have been resolved to Europe’s satisfaction.

 

As well, Canada is prepared to give Europeans more market access in protected sectors such as telecommunications, which has restrictions on foreign ownership, as well as uranium mining, postal services and insurance.

 

Overall, the two sides say they will completely eliminate all industrial tariffs within seven years, a measure that will save Canadian exporters $213 million annually — and European exporters $635 million — at current exchange rates.

 

While negotiations have closed the gaps on some issues, sources say they remain apart on several others, particularly agriculture and urban transit project procurement.

2013-06-05 Hamilton NZ removes fluoride (Hydrofluosilicic Acid) from water supply, similar developments elsewhere

 Fluoride, Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category), Mercury poisoning, dental amalgams. See also Vaccinations.  No Responses »
Jun 112013
 

People are generally incredulous when they discover what the “fluoride” they put into the water supply, actually is.   There’s a pretty good explanation at Fluoridation – At Any Cost, Dr. Hardy Limeback.

But please see:  2013-06-05  Hamilton City Council, NZ, voted 7-1 to remove Hydrofluosilicic Acid (fluoride) from water supply.

I wish I had time to help the effort in my City to stop fluoridation.   The evidence is indisputable for anyone who will just take the time to do a little research, if they’re in doubt.

We’ve followed a few of the developments:

 

2013-06-05 Hamilton City Council, NZ, voted 7-1 to remove Hydrofluosilicic Acid (fluoride) from water supply.

 Fluoride, Health, Mercury poisoning, dental amalgams. See also Vaccinations.  No Responses »
Jun 112013
 

http://www.hamilton.co.nz/our-council/news/Pages/Hamilton-to-end-fluoride-in-water.aspx

History was made at 10.15am on Wednesday 5th June 20133 when Hamilton City Council, NZ, voted 7-1 to remove Hydrofluosilicic Acid from our public water supply.

 

Hamilton to end fluoride in water

5 June 2013

Hamilton City Council has voted overwhelmingly to remove fluoride from the city’s water.

After four days of submissions a council tribunal today voted 7-1 to stop the practice of adding fluoride to the public water supply from no later than 21 June when stocks run out.  The tribunal was presented with research from experts and interested parties on both sides of the debate, although the majority were against fluoride.

Mayor Julie Hardaker tabled the motion to remove fluoride, seconded by Deputy Mayor Gordon Chesterman. Councillors on the tribunal to agree were Daphne Bell, Margaret Forsyth, Roger Hennebry, Dave Macpherson and Angela O’Leary.  Peter Bos was the only vote against.

Three councillors who are also on the Waikato District Health Board – Martin Gallagher, Pippa Mahood and Ewan Wilson – did not take part in the tribunal, along with John Gower and Maria Westphal  due to previously stated views on fluoride.

The Council will be writing to Health Minister Tony Ryall, expressing  its view that public water fluoridation is a health issue which central government should determine.

That point was stressed by Mayor Julie Hardaker today. “This is a matter for central government – not a local government job.

Ms Hardaker, who thanked submitters for their “respectful and considered” presentations, said the tribunal process gave the opportunity to see the two different views put forward by experts and community members to help make the decision.

She said there needed to be compelling reasons to change the status quo – Hamilton has been adding fluoride to its water since the 1960s.

Ms Hardaker said “potential and perceived risks’’ from fluoridation were raised at the tribunal, while there was no dispute that topical applications via toothpaste were effective against tooth decay.

She felt a telling statistic was that of the 220 litres of water a day used by the average Hamilton person, only  about 2 litres was consumed and the rest went to the wastewater system.

Deputy Mayor Gordon Chesterman said he was not satisfied fluoridation had achieved benefits “beyond reasonable doubt’’.

He urged the Government to crack down on sugar-laden drinks, which many tribunal submissions linked to dental decay, suggesting they be taxed like alcohol and tobacco.

He noted only 23 of 67 New Zealand councils still added fluoride as public opinion was changing. “Fluoride must go. Fluoride is not beyond reasonable doubt.”

Sugary drinks were a common target among councillors. “Sugar is  enemy No 1,” said Cr  Hennebry.  Cr Bell said she was going against her dentist’s advice in voting for “freedom of choice’’.

Cr Forsyth said she now had “sufficient doubt’’ about fluoride. Cr Macpherson said he was convinced fluoride was not safe, while Cr O’Leary strongly supported the motion and thought the tribunal had been a “really great process’’.

Cr  Bos, speaking against the motion, wanted a referendum on fluoride at the elections later this year.  “I think we are making a mistake. This should go to the people.”

Several councillors also mentioned the work of  Council staff in co-ordinating the 1557 submissions and running the tribunal.  “I want to thank everyone involved,” said Ms Hardaker. “This was an exercise in how democracy works.’’

The vote was greeted with applause from about 20 people in the public gallery.

The Council will make annual savings of $48,000 by removing fluoride. How that saving is used will be discussed at the Annual Plan deliberations tomorrow. An amendment by Cr Macpherson, seconded by Cr  Hennebry, to spend the $48,000 on increasing the Waikato District Health Board’s dental health education and intervention programme was lost in a 6-2 vote.

 

Fluoride fact sheet (PDF, 360KB)

HAMILTON CITY COUNCIL

Fluoridation Factsheet

INTRODUCTION

Council has considered on-going requests from the community on the practice of adding fluoride to the Hamilton water supply and made a decision to review fluoridation of the Hamilton Water Supply Policy.

Public consultation opened on 1 March and closed on 2 April 2013.

A total of 1557 submissions were received. The majority (1385) of submissions wanted Council to stop adding fluoride to the city water supply with 170 submissions supporting the continuation of fluoride. And two submission did do indicate a preference.

A tribunal-style hearing was held 28, 29, 30 May and 4 June 2013. This involved a co-ordinated presentation by both the opponents and supporters of water fluoridation to Council. In addition to these presentations, 141 individuals or representative organisations presented.

After four days of hearings, on 5 June 2013 Council voted 7-1 to stop the practice of adding fluoride to the public water supply from no later than 21 June when stocks run out.

SUBMISSIONS – HIGH LEVEL SUMMARY

The majority (1385) of submissions sought Council to stop adding fluoride to the city water supply with 170 submissions supporting the continuation of fluoride. 

A total of 984 submitters indicated they were Hamilton residents or ratepayers. A further 74 submitters indicated they were Hamilton water users (but not ratepayers or residents) 

The key reasons for submitters wanting Council to stop the fluoridation of the Hamilton water supply were around individuals having the right to choose what they ingest (994), the links between fluoride and a number of illnesses, risks and harm (807) and the perception that fluoride is considered ineffective (741). 

Of those wishing Council to continue to fluoridate the water supply (170), the key reasons were the perception that fluoridating the water supply is a cost-effective population-based strategy to prevent dental cavities (124), that there is scientific research to support fluoridation (45) and people citing their own experiences with the benefits (or problems due to the lack) of fluoride (46).

MANAGEMENT OF FLUORIDE IN THE WATER SUPPLY 

“Fluoride” is a general term used to refer to various chemical compounds of the element fluorine. Those chemicals can be naturally occurring, or man-made. 

Naturally occurring fluoride is found in air, soil, fresh water, sea water plants and many foods. Hamilton City Council uses the chemical hydrofluorosilicic acid (HFA) to fluoridate Hamilton’s water. 

Naturally occurring levels of fluoride in drinking water vary depending on the type of soil and rock that the water flows through. 

The Waikato River typically has a background fluoride level of approximately 0.2mg/L. 

Water fluoridation is the act of adding fluoride chemicals to city water supply. Fluoridation of treated water in Hamilton began in 1966 as a means of addressing oral health and dental decay issues using powdered sodium fluoride, and then changed to liquid hydrofluorosilicic acid (HFA) in 1985. 

The level of fluoride in drinking water recommended by the Ministry of Health is between 0.7-1.0mg/L. Hamilton’s target level of fluoride is between 0.70 mg/L and 0.80 mg/L. HFA is added to the treated water supply at a dose rate of approximately 0.5 – 0.6mg/L to achieve this level. 

The New Zealand Drinking Water Standards of New Zealand 2005 (revised 2008) specify a maximum acceptable level of 1.5mg/L of fluoride in treated water. Due to the therapeutic and maximum acceptable levels being relatively close, the water treatment station tightly controls and monitors the fluoride dosing system. 

Adding fluoride to the water supply costs approximately $48,000 per annum.

2013-06-11 GM Alfalfa Registered: Email Your MP Today

 Food, Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category), Genetically Modified  No Responses »
Jun 112013
 

Many thanks to Lucy Sharratt and CBAN:

 

GM Alfalfa Registered:

Email your MP instantly from http://www.cban.ca/alfalfaMPletter

Our government is siding with multinational companies against the best interests of farmers and our food system. I do not accept this. Do you?

Action Update on GM Alfalfa, June 11 2013:

The Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN) has uncovered that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency has recently approved one variety of genetically engineered alfalfa: a herbicide tolerant (Roundup Ready) alfalfa from Monsanto/Forage Genetics International. This means that one variety of GM alfalfa is now legal to sell in Canada. There could be more varieties approved over the summer (the process is completely secret).

 

However, GM alfalfa seeds are not yet on the market in Canada. Email your MP today: “Will you stand up to stop GM alfalfa from being released and contaminating our fields and food?” http://www.cban.ca/alfalfaMPletter

 

After the Day of Action to Stop GM Alfalfa on April 9 2013, the company Forage Genetics International stated that it would not put any GM alfalfa seeds on the market this spring. The company could, however, release GM alfalfa whenever it decides. CBAN is closely monitoring this situation.

The Minister of Agriculture, Gerry Ritz, chose not to intervene to stop the registration of this GM alfalfa. The Minister received almost 8000 email letters asking him to stop the release GM alfalfa and on April 9 people rallied in 38 communities across Canada. Most of these community actions took place outside local constituency offices of federal Members of Parliament and many petitions were delivered to MPs that they have now presented  in the House of Commons. Your outreach to your Members of Parliament has been very influential. As CBAN continues to implement various strategic work with you to stop the release of GM alfalfa, we ask you to continue your communication with your Member of Parliament. The Day of Action showed us that many MPs understand your concerns.

The recent discovery of contamination from unapproved GM wheat in the US clearly shows why stopping the introduction of GM crops like GM alfalfa is the only way to stop contamination.

 

The Canadian Biotechnology Action Network is committed to protecting family farms and our food system from GM contamination. Together, farmers, consumers and scientists in Canada stopped Monsanto’s Bovine Growth Hormone from being approved. We need to remember that this important victory took ten years of persistent campaigning. Last year, your actions with CBAN stopped the GM pig called “Enviropig”. In 2004, Monsanto withdrew its applications for approval of GM wheat in Canada and the US because of our protests. Through all these years, and many more victories, more people have become aware of this issue and more people have taken action. We are at a crossroads, and your action will help us turn in the right direction.

Please join us as we press forward. Thank you for your continued action and support.

Best regards, Lucy Sharratt, Coordinator

Lucy Sharratt, Coordinator
Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN)
Collaborative Campaigning for Food Sovereignty and Environmental Justice
Suite 206, 180 Metcalfe Street
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K2P 1P5
Phone: 613 241 2267 ext. 25
Fax: 613 241 2506
coordinator@cban.ca
www.cban.ca

Please donate today to support the campaigns! www.cban.ca/donate

2013-06-11 Corporate Carve-Up of Africa, Under the pretext of preventing hunger, the rich nations are engineering a new scramble for Africa. Monbiot. (Monsanto) GMO industrial agriculture, seize the land.

 Food, Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category), Genetically Modified, Health, Propaganda, Take back the University  No Responses »
Jun 112013
 

It is necessary to know how the industry / government / university alliance works, if we are to take back our food supply.   Please see:

 

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

“THE SCRAMBLE” HAS BEEN IN THE MAKING, AND IT’S NOT JUST IN AFRICA  –  EXCERPTS FROM FOUR EARLIER POSTINGS

In looking at the corporate takeover of agricultural land, the first three items below name different Industry front groups.  Why?  . . .  because the front groups are the VEHICLE for the takeover.

I include the fourth posting, not because it adds to the documentation of the takeover, but because it draws the front groups into one updated discussion.

It is necessary to know how the industry / government / university alliance works, if we are to take back our food supply.

 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Among the listed sponsors of the seed vault are: Monsanto; . . . world  agribusiness giants Dupont/Pioneer Hi-Bred and Syngenta, both promoting GMO seeds and all the chemicals needed for large scale monoculture farming . . .

Engdahl points out that the so called “Green  Revolution” was a steady networking grab, allowing the monopoly Rockefellers to  eventually gain control over much of international agribusiness while ruining small third world farms and forcing those farmers into cheap labor  pools.

 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Corporate ownership of farmland   

The information is about Canada (Agcapita). 

CBC Radio, The Current, did an interview some months ago  – –   a large pool of money (an American hedge fund managed by a Canadian woman) and the country was Africa.  It was pretty insidious how they propagandized African farmers about how much better off they would be if they sold their land but continued to farm it. 

It seemed obvious to me that the new “owners” will be dictating what crops and how they are raised (bioteched and chemicalled).  It’s industrialized farming and the number of “employees” won’t be many, not with the big machines they will bring in.  I hope there are lots of people to spread the word – the new owners won’t care whether or not local people are employed and can continue to feed themselves. 

Oh Lord!  what problems are created when there are large amounts of money in one place!   Coupled with absentee ownership – – give your money to someone to invest and all you care about is “return on investment”.  

We are all paying the food and environmental costs associated with this type of unsustainable, impoverishing agriculture.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

(5)     THANKS TO WIKILEAKS:  U.S. EMBASSY RECOMMENDS A LIST OF COUNTRIES FOR ‘RETALIATION’ OVER THEIR OPPOSITION TO GENETIC MODIFICATION 

This latest cable further confirms that globally promoting genetically modified foods is a high priority for the US State Department.  As discussed in a prior piece, numerous leaked cables reveal a strong focus by embassy officials on cataloging how nations perceive GMOs, boosting GM acceptance in Africa, and even going so far as to discuss spiking food prices to spur GM acceptance in Europe. The latest cable is no different: 

“Post will continue to lobby the Vatican to speak up in favor of GMOs, in the hope that a louder voice in Rome will encourage individual Church leaders elsewhere to reconsider their critical views.” 

Strong opposition within the church cites the monopoly control over food held by multinational corporations: 

“The Vatican cannot force all bishops to endorse biotechnology, he said, particularly if their opposition has to do with concerns over protecting profits of large corporations who hold the patents for the crops, versus feeding the hungry. In the Philippines, he noted, bishops strongly protested GMOs in the past. (Note: South African Cardinal Wilfrid Fox Napier’s November 16 comments to a news agency that ‘Africans do not need GMOs, but water’ is another example of specific Church leaders skeptical about the potential benefits of new biotechnologies.).” 

Corporate control of the food supply is only one problem with biotech foods, albeit a major one.  After fourteen years of commercial experience, the U.S. is fast becoming the poster child for why nations, and the Church, should reject such technology.

 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

. . .   More than 50 front groups, working on behalf of food and biotechnology trade groups―Monsanto being the most prominent―have formed a new coalition called Alliance to Feed the Future.   . . .  this alliance and many other industry-sponsored front groups masquerading as non-profits and consumer protection organizations are becoming increasingly exposed for what they really are …  how the food and agricultural industry hide behind friendly-sounding organizations aimed at fooling the public, policymakers and media alike.

2013-06-10 Under the pretext of preventing hunger, the rich nations are engineering a new scramble for Africa. Monbiot. (Monsanto)

 Food, Genetically Modified  No Responses »
Jun 112013
 

By George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 11th June 2013

Corporate Carve-Up 

One of the stated purposes of the Conference of Berlin in 1884 was to save the people of Africa from the slave trade. To discharge this grave responsibility, the European powers discovered, to their undoubted distress, that they would have to extend their control and ownership of large parts of Africa.

In doing so, they accidentally encountered the vast riches of that continent, which had not in any way figured in their calculations, and found themselves in astonished possession of land, gold, diamonds and ivory. They also discovered that they were able to enlist the labour of a large number of Africans, who, for humanitarian reasons, were best treated as slaves.

One of the stated purposes of the G8 conference, hosted by David Cameron next week, is to save the people of Africa from starvation. To discharge this grave responsibility, the global powers have discovered, to their undoubted distress, that their corporations must extend their control and ownership of large parts of Africa. As a result, they will find themselves in astonished possession of Africa’s land, seed and markets.

David Cameron’s purpose at the G8, as he put it last month, is to advance “the good of people around the world”(1). Or, as Rudyard Kipling expressed it during the previous scramble for Africa, “To seek another’s profit, / And work another’s gain … / Fill full the mouth of Famine / And bid the sickness cease”(2). Who could doubt that the best means of doing this is to cajole African countries into a new set of agreements, which allow foreign companies to grab their land, patent their seeds and monopolise their food markets?

The New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, which bears only a passing relationship to the agreements arising from the Conference of Berlin, will, according to the US agency promoting it, “lift 50 million people out of poverty over the next 10 years through inclusive and sustained agricultural growth.”(3) This “inclusive and sustained agricultural growth” will no longer be in the hands of the people who are meant to be lifted out of poverty. How you can have one without the other is a mystery that has yet to be decoded. But I’m sure the alliance’s corporate partners – Monsanto, Cargill, Dupont, Syngenta, Nestlé, Unilever, Itochu, Yara International and others – could produce some interesting explanations(4).

The New Alliance offers African countries public and private money (the UK has pledged £395m of foreign aid(5)) if they strike agreements with G8 countries and the private sector (which means, in many cases, multinational companies). Six countries have signed up so far.

That African farming needs investment and support is indisputable. But does it need land grabbing? Yes, according to the deals these countries have signed. Mozambique, where local farmers have already been evicted from large tracts of land, is now obliged to write new laws promoting what its agreement calls “partnerships” of this kind(6). Cote d’Ivoire must “facilitate access to land for smallholder farmers and private enterprises”(7). Which, in practice, means evicting smallholder farmers for the benefit of private enterprises. Already French, Algerian, Swiss and Singaporean companies have lined up deals across 600,000 hectares or more of this country’s prime arable land. These deals, according to the development group GRAIN, “will displace tens of thousands of peasant rice farmers and destroy the livelihoods of thousands of small traders.”(8) Ethiopia, where land grabbing has been accompanied by appalling human rights abuses, must assist “agriculture investors (domestic and foreign; small, medium and larger enterprises) to … secure access to land”(9).

And how about seed grabbing? Yes, that too is essential to the well-being of Africa’s people. Mozambique is now obliged to “systematically cease distribution of free and unimproved seeds”, while drawing up new laws granting intellectual property rights in seeds which will “promote private sector investment”(10). Similar regulations must also be approved in Ghana, Tanzania and Cote d’Ivoire.

The countries which have joined the New Alliance will have to remove any market barriers which favour their own farmers. Where farmers comprise between 50 and 90% of the population(11), and where their livelihoods are dependent on the non-cash economy, these policies – which make perfect sense in the air-conditioned lecture rooms of the Chicago Business School – can be lethal.

Strangely missing from the New Alliance agreements is any commitment on the part of the G8 nations to change their own domestic policies. These could have included farm subsidies in Europe and the US, which undermine the markets for African produce, or biofuel quotas, which promote world hunger by turning food into fuel. Any constraints on the behaviour of corporate investors in Africa (such as the Committee on World Food Security’s guidelines on land tenure(12)) remain voluntary, while the constraints on their host nations become compulsory. As in 1884, the powerful nations make the rules and the weak ones abide by them. For their own good, of course.

The West, as usual, is able to find leaders in Africa who have more in common with the global elite than they do with their own people. In some of the countries which have joined the New Alliance, there were wide-ranging consultations on land and farming, whose results have been now ignored in the agreements with the G8. The deals between African governments and private companies were facilitated by the World Economic Forum, and took place behind closed doors(13).

But that’s what you have to do when you’re dealing with “new-caught, sullen peoples, / Half-devil and half-child”(14), who perversely try to hang on to their own land, their own seeds and their own markets. Even though David Cameron, Barack Obama and the other G8 leaders know it isn’t good for them.

 

www.monbiot.com
References:
1. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-uks-g8-agenda-increasing-trade-fairer-taxes-and-greater-transparency
2. Rudyard Kipling, 1899. The White Man’s Burden.
3. http://www.usaid.gov/unga/new-alliance
4. You can see which corporations have made agreements with particular countries by reading the Cooperation Framework documents accessible here: http://www.feedthefuture.gov/article/food-security-and-g8-summit
5.  (Link no longer valid   http://www.waronwant.org/overseas-work/food-sovereignty/g8/17893-stop-uks-multimillion-giveaway-to-multinationals)
6. http://feedthefuture.gov/sites/default/files/resource/files/Mozambique%20Coop%20Framework%20ENG%20FINAL%20w.cover%20REVISED.pdf
7. http://feedthefuture.gov/sites/default/files/resource/files/Ivory%20Coast%20Coop%20Framework%20ENG_Final%20w.%20cover.pdf
8. GRAIN, 11th March 2013. The G8 and Land Grabs in Africa.  http://www.grain.org/article/entries/4663-the-g8-and-land-grabs-in-africa
9. http://feedthefuture.gov/sites/default/files/resource/files/Ethiopia_web.pdf
10. http://feedthefuture.gov/sites/default/files/resource/files/Mozambique%20Coop%20Framework%20ENG%20FINAL%20w.cover%20REVISED.pdf
11. World Bank, “World Databank”, http://databank.worldbank.org/data/home.aspx, cited by African Centre for Biosafety and others, 15th May 2013. STATEMENT BY CIVIL SOCIETY IN AFRICA. http://www.acbio.org.za/activist/index.php?m=u&f=dsp&petitionID=3
12. Food and Agriculture Organization, 2012. Voluntary Guidelines on the responsible governance of tenure of land, fisheries and forests in the context of national food security. http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i2801e/i2801e.pdf
13. Through its Grow Africa Partnership.
14. Rudyard Kipling, as above.

2013-06-10 CO2, the Keeling Curve explained. Went past 400 ppm. AND – if you’re in Saskatoon, come to the Library (Thursday, 13th)

 Climate, Energy, Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category), Green Party  No Responses »
Jun 102013
 

(1)     This CBC footage explains the Keeling curve and puts it in context.

(Starts with two short ads.  A small portion has voice but no picture. But it corrects; the clarity of information is worth the minor annoyances.):

8:23
Duncan McCue visits an observatory that was set up 5 decades ago to measure carbon dioxide levels

 

(2)    Most of our communities have people who are working their butts off, to bring people together to find solutions. 

IMPORTANT IN SASKATOON AREA:

Please let people know:   Thursday, June 13, 2013 at 7:00 PM,  at the Theatre in the basement of the (downtown) Frances Morrison Library at 311-23rd Street East.

Global Warming:  Crisis, Solutions, Opportunities

Green Party 

—  Dianne Rhodes:    “Global Climate Reality and Living on the New Eaarth”
—  Dr. Mark Bigland-Pritchard:  “Climate Chaos:  Canada’s Role in Keeping It Manageable”
—  Prof. Patricia Farnese:  “No way, Freeway:  The Time Is Now to Take Action for a Sustainable Saskatoon”
— Screening of Do the Math documentary

 

Invite your friends!

Facebook sign-up:  https://www.facebook.com/events/147612605422906/ and invite your friends.

 Older Entries  Newer Entries