The GLP is committed to full transparency. Download and review our Annual Report.

‘Solution for problem that doesn’t exist’? Australian politicians considering compensation fund to cover ‘contamination’ from GMO crops

| | March 19, 2018

THE lawyer who spearheaded Kojonup farmer Mike Baxter’s legal defence in the landmark legal test case over Genetically Modified (GM) crops has issued a stern warning about a political inquiry that’s considering setting-up a compensation fund for GM “contamination” in WA.

Brian Bradley of Bradley Bayley Legal says the inquiry is “looking for a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist”, based on the findings of the legal battle in the WA Supreme Court, as ruled by Justice Ken Martin in his 150-page judgment handed down in 2014 and confirmed by subsequent appeals.

Mr Bradley’s legal team won the litigation claim that was pursued by Mr Baxter’s neighbours, Steve and Sue Marsh, seeking compensation for losing their organic certification, when GM canola swaths were detected on their farm in late 2010.

Mr Bradley said the legal test-case cleared the GM farmer of any wrongdoing and showed GM canola was considered scientifically safe.

He said at trial, the defence called Dr Patrick Rudelsheim – an expert witness from Belgium – who gave evidence that GM canola wasn’t toxic or harmful and was incapable of causing any damage to people, animals or the land.

His evidence established that GM canola was incapable of cross-pollination with just about any other plant, except canola, and had a “remote chance” of cross pollination with some turnip varieties.

Read full, original post: GM compensation fund is solution to a problem that doesn’t exist

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion, and analysis. Click the link above to read the full, original article.
News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.

Send this to a friend