Corporate Europe Observatory

Exposing the power of corporate lobbying in the EU

GM food tasting: Farmers or EuropaBio?

  • Dansk
  • Nederlands
  • English
  • Suomi
  • Français
  • Deutsch
  • Ελληνικά
  • Italiano
  • Bokmål
  • Polski
  • Portuguese
  • Română
  • Slovenščina
  • Español
  • Svenska

The Farmers Biotech Network GM Food tasting event,reported on by Corporate Europe Observatory recently, was not paid for by the farmers network, CEO has learned, but by EuropaBio. This sponsorship was not made clear to the people attending the event, or the media.The Farmers Biotech Network GM Food tasting event,reported on by Corporate Europe Observatory recently, was not paid for by the farmers network, CEO has learned, but by EuropaBio. This sponsorship was not made clear to the people attending the event, or the media.

The Farmers Biotech Network GM Food tasting event,reported on by Corporate Europe Observatory recently, was not paid for by the farmers network, CEO has learned, but by EuropaBio.

This sponsorship was not made clear to the people attending the event, or the media. The press pack only mentioned that the FBN had ‘shared some travel and accommodation costs with industry’ – and did not mention the involvement of the biotech industry’s main lobby group. The ‘private’ event, starring genetically modified MON810 polenta and organised by lobbying company Edelman-TheCentre on behalf of the ‘Farmers Biotech Network’, was part of industry’s campaign to persuade  MEPs to ‘give farmers more choice’ in growing GM crops.

David Hill, the chairmaan of the FBN (uniting a mere 18 farmers from different European countries) told CEO when asked  that “No fees or salaries are paid to its members, who are all volunteers. For this event, they have shared some travel and accommodation costs with industry".

Hill added that “In the interest of balance we are sure you will agree that despite the fact that you were not invited to this private event, you were allowed to stay and you were allowed to speak to all those who participated.” But the representatives of CEO and Via Campesina who were present, had been told by The Centre that it was an open event.

Edelman-TheCentre’s involvement in the lobbying activities of the FBN goes back a long way. In November 2009, staff from The Centre (Nailia Dindarova and Guillermo Beltrà) were present at another FBN meeting in Brussels. During that time, the Farmers Biotech network “and a cluster of cross-party MEPs in Brussels” came out together saying that “national governments must help strengthen farmers' ability to meet current and future expectations of GM farm productivity amidst ’media driven’ consumer hostility and expanding imports”. (source: AgBiotech Reporter)

Both Dindarova and Beltrà have lobbyists’ access passes to the European Parliament, but Edelman-TheCentre is not in the EU Commission’s lobbying register. According to Edelman-TheCentre, “EuropaBio have been our client for some years now and we continue to provide them with ongoing consultancy support.”

In December 2009, the FBN released a statement which started:  “We, farmers from all over Europe”, despite the very limited number of farmers that are actually member of the FBN. They called on ‘European leaders’ to “allow us to become more competitive and more sustainable.”

It seems that rather than representing a substantial number of farmers, the Farmers Biotech Network is paid and used by EuropaBio as ‘another’ pro-GM voice in their lobby efforts.

The Farmers Biotech Network GM Food tasting event,reported on by Corporate Europe Observatory recently, was not paid for by the farmers network, CEO has learned, but by EuropaBio. This sponsorship was not made clear to the people attending the event, or the media. The press pack only mentioned that the FBN had ‘shared some travel and accommodation costs with industry’ – and did not mention the involvement of the biotech industry’s main lobby group. The ‘private’ event, starring genetically modified MON810 polenta and organised by lobbying company Edelman-TheCentre on behalf of the ‘Farmers Biotech Network’, was part of industry’s campaign to persuade  MEPs to ‘give farmers more choice’ in growing GM crops.David Hill, the chairmaan of the FBN (uniting a mere 18 farmers from different European countries) told CEO when asked  that “No fees or salaries are paid to its members, who are all volunteers. For this event, they have shared some travel and accommodation costs with industry".Hill added that “In the interest of balance we are sure you will agree that despite the fact that you were not invited to this private event, you were allowed to stay and you were allowed to speak to all those who participated.” But the representatives of CEO and Via Campesina who were present, had been told by The Centre that it was an open event.Edelman-TheCentre’s involvement in the lobbying activities of the FBN goes back a long way. In November 2009, staff from The Centre (Nailia Dindarova and Guillermo Beltrà) were present at another FBN meeting in Brussels. During that time, the Farmers Biotech network “and a cluster of cross-party MEPs in Brussels” came out together saying that “national governments must help strengthen farmers' ability to meet current and future expectations of GM farm productivity amidst ’media driven’ consumer hostility and expanding imports”. (source: AgBiotech Reporter)Both Dindarova and Beltrà have lobbyists’ access passes to the European Parliament, but Edelman-TheCentre is not in the EU Commission’s lobbying register. According to Edelman-TheCentre, “EuropaBio have been our client for some years now and we continue to provide them with ongoing consultancy support.”In December 2009, the FBN released a statement which started:  “We, farmers from all over Europe”, despite the very limited number of farmers that are actually member of the FBN. They called on ‘European leaders’ to “allow us to become more competitive and more sustainable.”It seems that rather than representing a substantial number of farmers, the Farmers Biotech Network is paid and used by EuropaBio as ‘another’ pro-GM voice in their lobby efforts.
 

Polluters in Peru blog

In a joint open letter to the EU Commission, eight farmers', environmental and food safety organisations demand that products derived from new methods of genetic engineering for plants and animals should not escape GM risk assessment and labelling.
CEO, Compassion in World Farming, ARC2020, Friends of the Earth Europe and Via Campesina co-publish a brochure spelling out the threats of a potental Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) to the future of good food and farming. Proponents of TTIP argue that it will increase trade leading to economic growth and jobs. But opponents have voiced many concerns, including its impact on food and farming on both sides of the Atlantic and its potential to underm ine a more sustainable food system. This brochure explains how TTIP will promote the industrial model of food and farming, further threatening the survival of small family farms, local food initiatives, standards for healthy and safe food, animal welfare, the environment, and public health.
An analysis of the revised independence policy of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). More reworded than revised, actually.
Will EFSA become more transparent, and to lobbyists or scientists? After its public consultation on its draft transparency policy, the Authority must now choose.
The 'cash for access' scandal in the UK has taken the House of Commons by storm and prompted a vote about banning certain second jobs for MPs. CEO looks at what the scandal shows us about the loopholes in the European Parliament's own rules and procedures.
Corporate Europe Observatory analyses the UK government's grid of stakeholders working on TTIP which clearly illustrates how the forces for and against the EU-US trade deal are shaping up.
The recent cases of former MEPs going through the revolving door, including a number of UK Liberal Democrats, has once again shown why the European Parliament needs to draw up new rules to tackle the risk of any possible conflicts of interest arising.
Many who walked past the BNP Paribas Fortis' central Brussels branch during their lunch break yesterday were surprised by what they saw: activists-turned-bailiffs removing tables, chairs and other materials from the building, leaving them out on the pavement. At a time of severe cuts to social spending in Belgium because all the money has been spent bailing out the banks, citizens repossessed bank furniture as the first step in recouping the billions of Euros that BNP Paribas – who controversially bought Begian bank Fortis in 2009 – helped its client avoid via its 214 branches located in tax havens.

Alternative Trade Mandate

Corporate Europe Forum