Tony Kakooza reports on the new Biotech Bill in Uganda and questions its viability for local farmers:
"There is a new Bill in Uganda called the
National Biotechnology and Biosafety Bill that is soon to be discussed in
Parliament. The hope is that this Bill, when enacted, will offer guidance in
the production of genetically modified crops in Uganda. However, there are
mixed concerns over this Bill. Regardless of the fact that the Bill was drafted
eight years ago and has undergone various changes, it’s having been introduced
into Parliament as a Private members Bill is enough to show that consultations
and research on the Bill were not adequate enough. Some view it as an
Intellectual property development with on-going R&D in the patenting of
life forms and experiments on plant variety. Proponents of the Bill also argue
that it is an international requirement for all countries carrying out research
on genetically modified organisms to have a regulation in place to guide the
practice.
Others are more skeptical and are concerned
about the impact this may have on food security and the nature of the
relationship amongst Farmers’ co-operative societies – not to mention the
health concerns upon consumers of genetically modified crops. In the United
States, for instance, there are a number of petitions going around (In States
such as Illinois) with demands that producers of genetically modified foods
should label them as such to enable consumers exercise a better purchasing
option. These petitions are mainly derived from fears over the
health-associated risks. The Ugandan Daily
Monitor newspaper also reports about the detrimental effect that some
genetically engineered products have on farm crops and on soil fertility (See: Ugandan farmers do not need GMOs, By
Vivian Asedri – March 1, 2013).
Uganda is generally well endowed with
fertile soils and good weather conditions for farming. Nonetheless, there is a
lot of rhetoric where genetically modified crops are involved: Rather than push
for modification and boosting agricultural production through biotechnological
means, wouldn’t farmers be served better through improvements in the
transportation system; a supply of fertilizers; and, better farming material?
Ugandan Farmers also face bad seasons and poor productions every year. Don’t we
therefore envisage cases of unfair competition where
farmers with genetically modified products will out-compete organic products in
the market? Will consumers be able to tell the difference between these
products?
Looking at this issue in context,
biotechnology sprung up from developed economies that are more industrial than
agro-based. The likes of U.S big companies, such as Monsato, derive their
commercial benefits on the Constitutional mandate to “promote the progress of Science . . . by securing for limited times to
authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and
discoveries”. It is all purely business to them and the patenting system
supports this. Developing countries like Uganda on the other hand are - to a
great extent - Agro-based, with a large part of the population depending on
subsistence farming. As such, bringing in biotechnological developments in
their back yards is likely to ultimately destroy their means of survival."
1 comments:
Write commentsKakooza, When you write an article to justify how this bill should not be passed take some time to do your research before quoting the likes of Mr Vivian Asedri. The technonology of 1 generational seed also know as terminator gene technology was never commercialised by Monsato (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/465222.stm). Most of our social scientists and activists need to first take some time understand the bill its content (most of the science in GMO technology is straight forward) None the less Biotechnology Bill also protects the country from various lab entreprenuers from doing harmful research without any law to guide them.
ReplyDonald Byamugisha Msc Biotechnology Georgetown '10