The EU are at it again

[VEG]

got an e-mail today passed onto me from our association secretary from the Food Standards Agency (FSA)

This is the letter

"Following our conversation earlier today please find attached a copy of a letter from the FSA Wales requesting information about the impact of a European Court ruling regarding GM pollen.

My understating is that whilst the FSA in Wales are conducting this call for information, the exercise is also taking place across the other regions of the UK so all views will eventually form part of a UK wide response to European Commission.

For information I have attached a copy of the Honey Directive and the GM . You will see that in Annexe II which sets out the quality criteria for honey that it is clear that pollen cannot be removed from a honey unless it is to be marketed as Filtered Honey. It seems that the contradiction is that if pollen cannot be removed from honey then it cannot be considered an ingredient as far as the honey directive is concerned but the European Court has taken the view that under a different set of regulations relating to genetically modified organisms then it is an ingredient. This contradiction was clearly not intended when the legislation was drafted so hence the call for information as to the likely impact so that the FSA and in turn the European Commission can use this as evidence to justify amending the legislation appropriately.

I am ashamed to say that I know no more information about this issue other than what is included in the letter but a quick Google search has found a number of articles that may be of interest to you and your members. As you will see, some of these articles take quite opposing views as to whether the court decision was a good or a bad thing."

link with info

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/gardening/beekeeping/8873410/European-court-rules-beekeepers-must-prove-GM-pollen-is-not-an-ingredient-of-honey.html

This is something that will affect us all.

 

[itma]

It only need affect the bureaucrats.
Not ordinary beekeepers.

The ECJ referred back to the Bavarian court the question of whether 'GM Pollen' was or was not a 'GMO' for legislative purposes (the decision being down to the scientific question of whether or not the pollen could transmit its modified DNA).
If the decision comes back that it is a GMO, then if the bureaucrats find GM pollen in your honey, they can ban it from sale.


However, what the letter seemed to be asking about was something different - the tricky bureaucratic point that naturally there is pollen in honey but you aren't allowed to have any 'ingredients' in honey.

It seems that the contradiction is that if pollen cannot be removed from honey then it cannot be considered an ingredient as far as the honey directive is concerned but the European Court has taken the view that under a different set of regulations relating to genetically modified organisms then it is an ingredient.

I would suggest that they apply exactly the same logic to pollen as they do to Glucose and Fructose in honey.
It is there, naturally.
Its concentration varies.
It wouldn't be honey if it was removed.
Just like pollen.
When you label something as "Honey", it is not necessary to state "This natural product contains Glucose, Fructose, Pollen and quite possibly Beeswax in varying amounts."
And it should not become necessary.
Labelling it as "Honey" describes the contents perfectly.


Further, to satisfy the ECJ, it is reasonable to say that GM pollen should indeed be declared on the label if it is present, even though such a product cannot be offered for sale.
Though, as the ECJ has not spoken with reference to non-GM products, there is no such need to declare non-GM pollen.

Simples?

 

[Brosville]

The Torygraph article is fairly unambiguous "Suppliers of honey whose pollen is found to be more than 0.9 per cent GM will have to undergo full safety authorisation and label their honey accordingly" - seems to be entirely reasonable to me - I choose not to have GM products in my diet, the US is putting a great deal of pressure on Europe to accept GM frankencrap, so if GM crops are allowed in the UK, it seems reasonable that it should be labelled as containing it (if above "trace" levels) - which rather says to me that GM should be resisted at all levels - we don't want or need it, the only benefit is to the amoral multinational companies like Monsanto.
There is every danger that the present government will be stupid enough to open the doors, Caroline "GM lobbying company owner" Spelman is at the head of DEFRA, and my spies tell me it is on the Nasty party's agenda..........

 

[VEG]

How would we prove that our honey contains no gm pollen would we have to pay to get it tested?

 

[gavin]

Rather than the EU, it is a combination of pressure from German campaigners and the ECJ. All fired off by a guy who wanted to prove the contamination so he moved his bees close to a GM maize trial.

It is all getting a bit silly.

 

[itma]

How would we prove that our honey contains no gm pollen would we have to pay to get it tested?

You should prove it is uncontaminated in exactly the same way that you currently prove the levels of Arsenic, Dioxin and Chernobyl residues.

 

[VEG]

But it is normally these silly rules that get adopted.

 

[itma]

But it is normally these silly rules that get adopted.

The letter is asking for help to make the new rules not-silly.

I've indicated how that could be done - ordinary pollen is an ordinary part of honey, like Glucose and Fructose or even traces of Beeswax, and need not be declared.

The decision on whether or not GM pollen in honey constitutes a GMO has not yet (AFAIK) been made by the Bavarian Court - thus there is as yet no pressing need to consider how to respond. But one plausible route (IF and ONLY IF the Bavarians decide it is a GMO) would be to consider that GM (and only GM) pollen was a "declarable ingredient".

 

[Brosville]

"It is all getting a bit silly" - couldn't agree more - Europe made it's views re GMOs known a few years ago - we don't want or need the damn stuff, but there is a concerted campaign to force it upon us, and no underhand trick has been overlooked. It is a shame that honey may be a pawn in the game to try and resist the onslaught of frankencrap, but if it is what wakes people up to what is going on, so be it!

It's fairly simple, if HM Government has the good sense to tell Monsanto where they can stuff the damn rubbish, and halt all trials in the open air, then no UK produced honey should have more than tiny traces of GM, so it ceases to be an issue.

I could "go on" for pages about GM, but my biggest objection to it is that it removes the right from those of us who don't want it in our diets, as the pollen contaminates surrounding crops (and can lead to the ludicrous situation where an organic farmer's crops can be polluted by the stuff, then Monsanto sues the farmer for stealing their technology...........) - More than a "bit silly" in fact, bulldozing an unwanted technology onto the world in the pursuit of profit, whatever the cost to the environment..... rather like those nice pesticide companies............

 

[thorn]

"It is all getting a bit silly" - couldn't agree more - Europe made it's views re GMOs known a few years ago - we don't want or need the damn stuff, but there is a concerted campaign to force it upon us, and no underhand trick has been overlooked. It is a shame that honey may be a pawn in the game to try and resist the onslaught of frankencrap, but if it is what wakes people up to what is going on, so be it!

It's fairly simple, if HM Government has the good sense to tell Monsanto where they can stuff the damn rubbish, and halt all trials in the open air, then no UK produced honey should have more than tiny traces of GM, so it ceases to be an issue.

I could "go on" for pages about GM, but my biggest objection to it is that it removes the right from those of us who don't want it in our diets, as the pollen contaminates surrounding crops (and can lead to the ludicrous situation where an organic farmer's crops can be polluted by the stuff, then Monsanto sues the farmer for stealing their technology...........) - More than a "bit silly" in fact, bulldozing an unwanted technology onto the world in the pursuit of profit, whatever the cost to the environment..... rather like those nice pesticide companies............

 

[thorn]

Whoops. The icon didn't attach to that last posting.

 

[thorn]

Oh yes it did. My computer ski
Ls, like my beekeeping, are a bit wanting.

 

[Finman]

.
Part of this debate is agricultural policy between Europe and America.
Idea is to protect Europe from over dose markets of America.


Folks are mad with those GMO attitudes. In our country we have no GMO plants but beekeeping assosiation produce letters which resist absolutely GMO.
One society made an letter half year ago where it wrote that reason to CDD is GMO. - how, never mind. LOOK THE bIG FIGURE!

So we have a big global experiment. 80% of Canadian canola/rape is GMO. What happens to North American people?

over 60% of wold soya id GMO. What happens to all animals!!!!

It was told to me that I must resist GMO. I asked why? Because all other beekeepers in the whole world resist it.

There are better reasons to become mad in the world than GMO

Carry on. It makes bloob to circulate.
.

.

 

[Heather]

I am losing the will to live with all these bureaucratic bloody idiots. Leave me alone with my bees - concentrate on the tax avoiders!!!!!

 

[Brosville]

There are times (admittedly not often) that I'm very grateful for obstructive EU bureaucrats - if it means that GMOs are kept out of Europe, then I think they've for once done something useful.

I too want to be left alone with my bees, untainted by GM pollen!

 

[justme]

"It is all getting a bit silly" - couldn't agree more - Europe made it's views re GMOs known a few years ago - we don't want or need the damn stuff, but there is a concerted campaign to force it upon us, and no underhand trick has been overlooked. It is a shame that honey may be a pawn in the game to try and resist the onslaught of frankencrap, but if it is what wakes people up to what is going on, so be it!

It's fairly simple, if HM Government has the good sense to tell Monsanto where they can stuff the damn rubbish, and halt all trials in the open air, then no UK produced honey should have more than tiny traces of GM, so it ceases to be an issue.

I could "go on" for pages about GM, but my biggest objection to it is that it removes the right from those of us who don't want it in our diets, as the pollen contaminates surrounding crops (and can lead to the ludicrous situation where an organic farmer's crops can be polluted by the stuff, then Monsanto sues the farmer for stealing their technology...........) - More than a "bit silly" in fact, bulldozing an unwanted technology onto the world in the pursuit of profit, whatever the cost to the environment..... rather like those nice pesticide companies............

me too,

 

[Finman]

There are times (admittedly not often) that I'm very grateful for obstructive EU bureaucrats - if it means that GMOs are kept out of Europe, then I think they've for once done something useful.

I too want to be left alone with my bees, untainted by GM pollen!

New plants are often protected with patents. It means a huge money flow to another continent if you buy every year seeds from some certain place. Hybrid seed are automatic protected

I have a Scottish raspberry Glen Ample. "This plant is protected by the Plant Variety Rights. Illegal propagation without a licence will lead to prosecution."
http://www.victoriananursery.co.uk/soft_fruits/raspberry_cane_glen_ample/

 

[Winker]

We have a secret GM trail in our area. They have bee hives set around the GM trail area, with some hives right on the same field and some hives at different distances away from the field. The beehives are there only to see what, if any GM pollen does get into the honey. And to see how far the pollen travels in the wind.

So GM crops are here, the powers that be are tailing it without public knowledge. This is one monster were not going to escape.

 

[Brosville]

We already know the pollen travels considerable distances - I think it is utterly disgraceful that these trials are taking place at all, and shows just how much hold the pernicious GM lobby has over government....
Aren't there any people in your neck of the wood with cojones, some gardening gloves and hefty frankencrap stomping boots?

 

[Winker]

I am looking for the details I had on it, I cant find them, but I will! I am sure its only GM grass that’s being grown but I could be wrong. So they are only looking for drifting pollen as the bees don't work the grass. It was brought up at the last committee meeting, which I don't have minuets on yet.

But it wont make any difference if it its GM grass or GM (insert your crop here). If it drifts into your hive its still GM pollen.