|
By Percy Schmeiser
Related story: Who is Percy Schmeiser? I’ve
been farming since 1947 when I took over from my father. My wife and I are known
on the Prairies as seed developers in canola and as seed savers. Hundreds of thousands
of farmers save their seed from year to year.
I was also a member of the provincial legislature. I was on many agricultural
committees, both on the provincial level and representing the province on the
federal level. I was mayor of my community and a councillor for over 25 years.
So, all my life I’ve worked for the betterment of farmers and rules, laws
and regulations that would benefit them and make their farming operations viable.
The whole issue of GMOs can be divided into three main categories: the first category
is the issue of the property rights of farmers versus the intellectual property
rights of multinationals like Monsanto. The second issue is the health and danger
to our food with the introduction of GMOs. The third issue is the environment.
Over this last year there have been other very important issues. The GM wheat
issue, and what I think is one of the worst things: the pharmaceutical issue of
GM plants producing prescription-type drugs, which I’ll touch on later.
I want to concentrate on the issue I’m involved with: Property rights of
farmers vs. the intellectual property rights of multinationals.
In August 1998 I received a lawsuit document from Monsanto. Up to that time I
never had anything to do with Monsanto’s GM canola. I’d never bought
their seed or gone to a Monsanto meeting. I didn’t even know a Monsanto
rep.
There were a number of items in the lawsuit. First of all, they said I had somehow
acquired Monsanto’s GM canola seed without a licence, planted it, grew it
and therefore infringed on their patent. They went on to say that it was 80 or
90 percent contamination that I had in a roadside ditch and so on.
When we were sued my wife and I immediately realized that 50 years of research
and development on our pure canola seed that was suitable and adaptable to certain
conditions on the Prairies, climatic and soil conditions and especially diseases
that we had in canola, could now be contaminated. We said to Monsanto at the time,
"Look, if you have any of your GMOs in our pure canola seed you are liable
for the destruction of our property and our pure seed." So, we stood up to
them.
I think at that time there were two main issues. We lost 50 years of research
and development and we felt that if farmers ever lose the right to use their own
seed the future development of new seeds and plants suitable to their local climatic
and soil conditions would be stopped. Those are the two main reasons we stood
up to Monsanto.
It took two years of pre-trial and in those two years Monsanto withdrew all allegations
that I had ever obtained seed illegally. They even went so far as to admit the
allegations were false.
But, they still found that the fact that they had found some of Monsanto’s
GM canola plants in the ditch along my field, not even in the field, meant I violated
the patent. So, it became a patent infringement case. I had no choice where it
would be heard. Patent laws are federal, so it was before the federal court of
Canada immediately, with one judge. It went to trial in June 2000 and lasted two
and a half weeks.
That ruling is what brought my case to international attention. These are some
of the main points:
1. It does not matter how Monsanto’s GM canola or soybeans or any GM plant
gets into a farmer’s field. The judge went on to specify how this could
happen: cross-pollination and direct seed movement. Believe me that’s a
primary cause - wind, birds and bees, because we have a lot of wind on the prairies.
The judge said it doesn’t matter how it gets into a farmer’s field,
destroying or contaminating your crop, it all becomes Monsanto’s property.
You no longer own your crop. That’s what startled people all over the world;
how an organic or conventional farmer can lose a crop and seeds or plants overnight.
He also went on to say that all the seeds and plants that my wife and I had developed
over half a century go to Monsanto.
2. The other issue was that my entire crop from all our canola fields in 1998
goes to Monsanto. He also ruled that I was not allowed to use my seeds or plants
again. So, all our research and development was gone and Monsanto got our crop
for nothing.
We went to the federal Court of Appeal, which took over a year. Then I had three
judges, but at the appeal court they only address the issues of facts of law,
points of law or where the first judge erred in law. The viability issue and the
property rights issue were never addressed.
After so many days of trial the federal Court of Appeal stated that although the
judges did not agree with all of the first judge’s decisions they upheld
his ruling. All three judges ruled against me.
Next was the Supreme Court of Canada. Now it was a pretty depressing time because
we didn’t know what our chances would be that the Supreme Court would hear
it. We applied in November 2002 and in May 2003 we received the best news in five
years of legal battle when the Supreme Court ruled that it would indeed hear the
case. That was a tremendous victory for us.
I’d like to explain the main issues of what the Supreme Court will be addressing.
I will concentrate on four or five facts out of many.
1. Can living organisms, seeds, plants, genes and human organs, be owned and protected
by corporate patents on intellectual property?
2. Who is responsible for the genetically modified traits of noxious weeds that
then become resistant to weed killers? We now have these super weeds.
3. Can farmers’ rights to grow conventional or organic crops be protected?
4. Can farmers keep the ancient right to save their own seed?
5. Who owns life?
The first trial judge said it doesn’t matter how it gets there, even when
he specified how this could happen. I think that’s what really alarmed farmers
and property owners in North America and right around the world, how quickly you
could lose your rights as a farmer.
Another issue that you never hear about in GMOs is the issue of corporate control
of contracts that exist on the Prairies of North America. You would say to yourself
that this can’t happen in a free country like Canada, but it has happened
and is happening even today.
Besides the environmental, food, health and contamination issues, there is the
issue of contracts. To me this is one of the most vicious contracts on the face
of the Earth, taking farmers’ rights away.
These are some of the main points in a contract with Monsanto:
1. A farmer can never use his own seeds.
2. You must always buy seeds from Monsanto.
3. You must only buy your chemicals from Monsanto.
4. If you commit some violation of this contract, and they fine you, you must
sign a non-disclosure statement that you cannot talk to the media or to your neighbours
about what Monsanto has done to you. Monsanto often says there have only been
a few cases, but we don’t really know because farmers have to sign this
non-disclosure statement.
Another point. You must pay Monsanto $15/acre per year licence fee for the privilege
of growing GMOs and in the 2003 contract they’ve added another clause -
you can no longer sue Monsanto for whatever reason. You can never take Monsanto
to court. That is their contract.
Another important issue, you must permit Monsanto’s detectives to come onto
your land or look in your granaries for three years after you sign this contract,
even though you may only grow it one year. And who is Monsanto’s police
force? They’re former RCMP officers. They go under the name of Robinson
Investigation Services of Saskatoon and they cover all of Canada. In the US it’s
the Pickerton Investigation Services.
In Monsanto’s advertisements they say that if you think your neighbour is
growing GM canola or soybeans without licence you should inform on them. If you
do this you get a free leather jacket from Monsanto. Believe me, there aren’t
many people on the prairies now wearing a new Monsanto jacket.
What happens when Monsanto gets this tip or rumour? They immediately send out
two of their detectives. We call them gene police on the Prairies. They’ll
go to the farmer’s home or farmyard and say to him or his wife that they
have this tip. But, first of all, they’ll always say they are ex-RCMP and
a lot of times the farmers don’t hear the "ex." They only hear
police. It’s a form of intimidation.

The Raging Grannies sing their satirical songs supporting Percy
Schmeiser |
They’ll say they have a tip or a rumour that you’re growing GM
canola without a licence and the farmer will say No, that he or she has never
had anything to do with it and doesn’t want to grow it. The farmer is often
told that he is lying and if he doesn’t confess Monsanto will drag him through
the courts and the farmer won’t have a farm left. So, it’s real harassment
and intimidation of farmers by these gene police.
Now what do you think happens when these detectives leave the farmer’s home?
The farmer will wonder which neighbour caused him the trouble. So, now we have
the breakdown of farmers not trusting one another and afraid to talk to one another.
We have the breakdown of our rural farm culture and society where farmers are
not working together or trusting one another.
My grandparents came from Europe in the late 1890s. I’m a third generation
farmer and our families had to work together to build our society, our infrastructure,
our schools, our roads and our hospitals. Now you have that breakdown of working
together and I think this is one of the worst things that could happen with the
introduction of GMOs.
Now, Monsanto doesn’t even stop there. Believe me, on this issue I’ve
had I don’t know how many farm wives crying on the phone after Monsanto’s
police have been there saying, "What can we do? They’ve threatened
us." And I’ll try to get them proper legal advice. That’s the
whole fear culture where farmers are even scared to talk to one another.
The other means of control is what can be considered extortion letters.
This has been done all across America. We don’t know how many thousands
of these letters have been sent out; I have quite a number of them. The letters
state: we have reason to believe that you might be growing Monsanto’s GM
canola or soybeans without a licence. We estimate you might have 200, 300 or 500
acres. In lieu of us not taking you to court send us $100,000 or $200,000. I’ve
got one here for $190,000. This one here is for $30,000 because they think someone
might be growing GM canola.
Can you imagine the fear in a farm family when they get a letter from a multibillion
dollar corporation asking for many thousands of dollars so the company might not
take them to court?!
Another clause: You’re not allowed to show this letter to anyone and you’re
not allowed to tell anyone that you’ve received this letter from Monsanto
or what Monsanto has done to you. So, a total suppression of farmers rights, freedom
of speech and expression.
If they can’t find a farmer at home and they don’t know his mailing
address, they can go to the local municipality and get the location of his land.
They will then use a small airplane or helicopter and drop a Monsanto Roundup
herbicide spray bomb on the field. It covers about 30 feet in diameter, in the
centre of a canola or soybean field.
About 12 days after Roundup has time to activate, they’ll fly back. If the
crop, which was hit by the spray, has died they’ll know the farmer has not
been using Monsanto’s Roundup, but if it hasn’t died, God help the
farmer.
These are the tactics. I’m talking about Canada and the US. This is what
a multinational corporation is doing here.
I’ve talked about our rural social fabric being broken down and how our
freedom is threatened as farmers. Two other very important issues come out of
this.
First, with the introduction of GMOs always remember there is no such thing as
containment. Once you introduce a life form, a life-giving form, into the environment
there is no calling back. You cannot contain the wind. You cannot contain the
seed movement through cross-pollination - birds, bees, and other animals. You
cannot contain it and it will spread as it has on the Prairies.
The other important issue is there is no such thing as co-existence.
Believe me, as a farmer for half a century, I know that once you introduce a GMO
gene into the environment, into any seed or plant, it’s a dominant gene.
It will eventually take over whatever species of plants it gets into. You can’t
have GMOs in the country and have organic or conventional farmers.
It will all eventually become GMOs. That is the danger. There is no more choice
left. Believe me, organic farmers on the Prairies no longer can grow soybeans
or canola. All our seed supply is now contaminated with GMOs. Those choices have
been taken away for both conventional and organic farmers.
The other issue to remember is canola comes from the brassica family, which includes
close cousins such as radishes, turnips and cauliflower. It is now cross-pollinating
into the close cousins.
Therefore, we’re again destroying many crops that organic farmers no longer
can raise.
The other issue is wheat. If GM wheat is ever given regulatory approval, which
is before the federal government right now, it will totally destroy the organic
farmers because wheat comes from the grass family and again will cross-pollinate
into both the close and even the distant cousins in canola and wild mustard. So,
remember there’s no such thing as containment or co-existence.
When Monsanto or the other corporations that promote GMO say they’ll make
buffer strips of so many feet, half a mile or a kilometre or so - there’s
no such thing as a safe distance. A whirlwind or especially all the geese and
ducks we have on the prairies. It passes through these birds after they eat it
and they may fly 50 or 100 miles.
I get asked a lot why farmers ever started to grow GMOs when they were introduced
in 1996. At that time Monsanto told farmers, among other things, that it would
be a bigger yield, that it was more nutritious and used less chemicals. I think
the third point is really what caught the farmers’ ears because on the prairies
since 1946-47, after the Second World War, farmers started using chemicals by
the hundreds of tons each year. A lot were highly potent and farmers realized
the damage being done to the environment, human health and animals.
There were other things Monsanto said and you’ll hear the same thing today:
We’ll now be able to feed a hungry world. We’ll always have sustainable
agriculture. Well, believe me, to feed a hungry world doesn’t take the Monsantos
of this world. What it takes to feed a hungry world is politics, transportation
and economics.
When I speak to farmers in Third World countries - Africa, India, Bangladesh and
so on - I tell them at least they have a choice left. We don’t have a choice
left for many of our grains in Canada. It’s all contaminated. And we didn’t
have anybody to come and tell us what could happen. We believed Monsanto, but
worst of all we believed our own federal government and they let us down on the
introduction of GMOs.
They were developed in government agricultural research stations across the Prairies,
so Ottawa is fully responsible. They also worked with Monsanto to develop GM wheat
on government test plots and research stations. Now it has been reported that
if GM wheat is introduced and the government gives regulatory approval the government
will get a royalty from Monsanto on every bushel.
We’re saying that if the government is going to receive royalties from Monsanto
on GM wheat how much has it already received on sales of GM canola all these years?
So it’s coming out that the government has been in bed with Monsanto giving
them regulatory approval and worked for them to develop the GMOs.
In a statement to the media Chris Jordan, Monsanto’s communications manager
for Canada, based in Winnipeg, stated that all these millions of dollars that
they collected from farmers is given to charities, they don’t keep it. So,
the question has been asked of Monsanto to name one charity they have given the
money to from fines. They have not replied.
Within two to three years after the introduction of GM canola on the Prairies,
through cross-pollination, our regular plants became a super weed.
Monsanto wasn’t the only company at that time selling GMOs, so, there were
now the GMOs from three companies combined in one canola plant which now took
at least three chemicals to control and kill. All Monsanto said was, "No
problem. We’ve now come up with a new, more super-toxic chemical to kill
the new super weed." So everything they said about less chemicals turned
out to be false. Now their yield is down about 6.4 percent on canola. The US Department
of Agriculture has admitted that soybeans yield is down at least 15 percent. So
now we have less yield.
The third issue of nutrition is that what they’re not saying is the quality
is way poorer, maybe half, of conventional canola. I won’t go into why that
is, but it’s primarily with the erucic acid content, the greens in canola,
which makes it more bitter for cooking.
So, now we have less yield, more chemical use, a new super weed and the quality
is much poorer.
I’ll say that if anything is going to lead to starvation or hunger it’s
the introduction of GMOs around the world.
I haven’t touched on the economic issue. We as Canadians cannot sell one
bushel of canola to the EU, so one-third of our markets have gone and our prices
have dropped. Now they want to introduce GM wheat where even the Canadian Wheat
Board said we would lose over 80 percent of our market.
I was in Japan a couple of months ago and I have a statement by the millers, the
processors and the consumers of Japan and South Korea which says what contracts
will be cancelled if we introduce GM wheat. That’s how serious it is.
I mentioned a bit about pharmaceutical plants. That is the worst curse that has
come in with the introduction of GMOs. I went through the whole 50 years of the
development of chemicals after WWII and then GMOs since the ‘80s. Now the
introduction of prescription drugs from GM plants - there were about 300 test
plots in North America last year.
In the US there are six major drugs now being produced by plants. I’m told
by scientists from universities in Indiana, Ohio and Nebraska that there is already
cross-pollination with close cousins of these species. The pharmaceutical plants
are primarily sunflowers and corn, or maize. Some of the prescription drugs being
produced by plants are vaccines, industrial enzymes, blood thinners, blood clotting
proteins, growth hormones and contraceptive drugs. These are all prescription
drugs now being produced by plants which are in the open.
I can’t believe that our governments are permitting prescription drugs to
be produced in the open. Plants are a cheap way of producing drugs compared to
laboratories.
What if someone has major surgery and then eats a food laced with a blood thinner,
or if a pregnant woman eats a food laced with a contraceptive? The introduction
of what they call pharma-plants, or prescription drug plants, is the worst curse
that is coming. Whether it’s GM wheat or soybeans these prescription drugs
are something we should all be concerned about.
What can we do? I think all of us must contact our MPs and members of the cabinet
as they have done in Europe and Japan. We have the right to know what we’re
eating. If people knew what they were eating, 90 percent of the Canadian people
would not eat GMO foods.
I haven’t spoken on the environmental issues or the issue of the safety
of food, but in Japan, the Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland and England, extensive
testing has been done on the health dangers of eating GMO products.
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency did not do one bit of testing. They only used
the data supplied to them by Monsanto. Japanese and Netherland governments are
now saying that the CFIA reached a fraudulent conclusion.
I forwarded these documents to the CFIA two weeks ago. I haven’t had a reply.
I also discussed it with them on the phone. What results we’ll get I don’t
know.
To give you another example, before I came here to Vancouver I received a call
from Germany. On German national television on Monday night there was a story
about a farmer who had illegally grown GMOs. I don’t know if it was soybeans
or corn, but he had fed it to his cattle and his cattle all died. He contacted
me to ask if he could use some of my documents that were submitted to the Supreme
Court.
He said the reason it’s just coming out now is because he didn’t say
anything to the authorities. He’d been growing it illegally. One of the
GMO companies had gotten him to do it. When his neighbours heard that his cattle
had died there was an inquiry and he finally admitted he had grown GMOs. That
is just one example.
I can give you all kinds of examples from the US where pigs fed GM soybeans will
not reproduce. Once they are off that feed they start to reproduce again.
However, my emphasis is really on farmers’ rights, the rights to use one’s
own seed from year to year. The judge in my first case ruled that although farmers
in Canada have the right by federal law to use their seed from year to year, Monsanto’s
patent law is over and above all farmers’ rights. Farmers do not have any
rights over patent law.
Another issue is that I never used Monsanto’s patent and in Canada patent
infringement is when you use a patent. To use their patent I would have had to
spray their chemical Roundup on my crop and I never did that. The judge ruled
that that was immaterial. He said the fact that plants were growing in the ditch
along my field meant the patent was violated.
At that time I had two scientists pull samples from all my fields. I had eight
fields of canola in 1998. These were sent to the University of Manitoba and they
tested the seeds and found that two of my fields had no contamination. Others
had one percent, some had two percent and one had eight percent. In the ditch
along the fields where we first noticed it, contamination was around 60 percent.
The judge said it didn’t matter. Even with the fields that had no contamination
he said because I was a seed saver and was using my seed from year to year there
was a probability there could be some of Monsanto’s GMOs in those fields
also, so the crop all goes to Monsanto.
So, even on a probability you can lose your rights overnight. That’s why
my case became so well known worldwide. Remember, it’s a total control of
the world’s seed supply they’re after and whoever controls that will
control the food supply. In many Third World nations whoever controls the food
supply controls the nation.
I have a lot of confidence in the Supreme Court of Canada and I’m sure they’ll
rule in favour of the rights of people to use their own seed from year to year.
I have photos to show you how fields have been contaminated and of Monsanto’s
gene police in farmer’s fields. These detectives go into any fields they
choose to without permission and steal seeds or plants to check on them. If a
farmer catches them trespassing they will laugh at the farmer and make threats.
When farmers hear what my wife and I have gone through with five years of legal
battles and about $300,000 in court costs and legal fees how can any farmer stand
up to them?
There is no justice for an average person. You cannot stand up to a multibillion-dollar
corporation in court. I would not have been able to do it without people from
all over the world, organizations and foundations. To give you an extent of the
ruthlessness of Monsanto, about a year ago they took me back to court on the issue
of their costs.
They sued me for $1 million this time because they said I was arrogant, stubborn
and didn’t do what they wanted.
So, what did the judge rule on that case? He ruled that I have to pay Monsanto
$153,000 for their court costs.
I think there was some humour in this because they had to itemize what some of
that million dollars was comprised of. There was $1,100 for a digital camera they
said they used in court - well, you know, you can’t use a camera in court
in Canada. The other issue, which I found slightly humorous, was $1,500 for light
entertainment of Monsanto’s lawyers while the court was on. I couldn’t
help but ask what light entertainment the lawyers had.
After the judge awarded them the $153,000 what did they do? They then put a lien
on all our land and even our house so I could no longer borrow any more money
to fight them. They tried to stop me financially. They tried to break us down
mentally. They would come into our driveway and sometimes park all day. When my
wife came out of the house they would take off. They watched us day after day
when we worked in our fields.
They try to intimidate us. A farmer in North Dakota, who they also had a lawsuit
against, said they even followed his children to school as a means of intimidation
and harassment to bring people down. As I said, this is what’s happening
in North America.
In conclusion, why did we stand up to Monsanto? My wife and I are 72 and 73. We
don’t know how many good years we have left and we look at it this way:
as a grandfather I ask what kind of legacy I want to leave to my grandchildren.
My grandparents and parents left a legacy of land. I don’t want to leave
a legacy to my children of land, air and water full of poisons. I’m sure
all of you tonight feel the same way.
So, we will go on fighting for the rights of farmers all over the world to be
able to use their own seed.
From a speech by Percy Schmeiser December 10, 2003 at Vancouver’s central
library sponsored by Council for Canadians www.canadians.org
Let Prime Minister Martin, the agriculture
minister and your MP know your feelings on this issue, click here.
If you can assist financially with the legal challenge facing Percy please go
to www.percyschmeiser.com or send your contribution to Fight Genetically Altered
Food Fund Inc., Box 3743, Humboldt, SK, S0K 2A0
Local media will broadcast Percy Schmeiser’s talk;
TV: Shaw Cable 4, a two part series: Part 1, Sat., Jan. 17, 1 - 1:30 pm
and 8 - 8:30 pm; Sun., Jan. 18, 12 midnight - 12:30 am. Part 2 Sat., Jan. 24,
1 - 1:30 pm and 8 - 8:30 pm; Sun., Jan. 25, 12 midnight - 12:30 am.
Radio: Animal Voices, as part of an all-day fundraising program for Co-op
Radio, 102.7 FM, noon - 2:30 pm, Jan. 3.
For more on the GMO controversy follow these links.
www.ocia.org
www.cog.ca
www.cropchoice.com
www.soilassociation.org
www.gks.com
www.foodnews.org
www.panna.org
www.econet.sk.ca
www.ramshorn.bc.ca
www.organicagcentre.ca
www.nfu.ca
www.oxfam.org
www.makingthelinksradio.ca
www.greenpeace.ca/e/campaign/gm
/depth/wheat/index.php
www.greenpeace.ca/e/campaign/gm
/depth/ pollution/cec_exec_summary.php
www.canadians-toronto.org/
campaigns.htmx?op=showit&cid=11
implants.clic.net/tony/Wahl/01.htm
www.cropchoice.com/leadstry.asp?recid=1208
www.saskorganic.com/oapf/links.html
www.cropchoice.com/leadstry.asp?recid=971
www.scholarly societies.org/soilsci
_soc.html
Top
|
|