The Netherlands

Acción contra el apoyo de WWF a la soja venenosa de Monsanto en las oficinas de WWF-Holanda

[img_assist|nid=376|title=WWF Action|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=200|height=163] El 19 de Mayo 2009, la oficina central de WWF-Holanda recibió unos peculiares visitantes que incluían un panda llorón, un director circense de Monsanto y varios personajes vestidos con trajes blancos pulverizando un falso 'Roundup'.

La acción es una protesta con motivo del próximo voto de la Mesa Redonda sobre Soja Responsable (RTRS, en inglés), el 28 de Mayo en Campinas (Brasil). Este foro permitirá certificar como 'responsable' la soja transgenica RoundupReady, a pesar de que en realidad, la promoción y uso de esta soja es responsable del uso masivo de agrotóxicos, de favorecer la deforestación de grandes superficies de bosques así como de la expulsión forzosa de pequeños campesinos de sus tierras. vease dos videos abajo

Dutch Parliament against RRII soy

November 13 2008

The Dutch Parliament has ordered the Minister of Agriculture, Gerda Verburg, to vote against the admission of GM soy variety MON 89788, in next week's Agriculture Council.

The motion to this end was an initiave of the Socialist Party.

Minister Verburg said in a short comment that the motion will be discussed in the cabinet, but that "Noone in Europe will understand this".

The Parliament is not convinced that this GM soy contributes to food security and reduced environmental contamination.

Verburg however, says not to see a reason to doubt the quality of the advice of EFSA, the European Food Safety Authority, on the matter.

Questions to the project group ‘'Sustainabable production of biomass'’ (Cramer Commission )

Questions to the Project Group ‘Sustainabable Production of biomass
’ [from, when?]

  1. The first part of the assignment of the project group was to “organise a stable structure of consultation and cooperation with stakeholders concerned..”. However, no organisations from the producer countries participated either in the project group, or are listed in the list of stakeholders. Also, the report was not translated in any of the languages of the producer countries, like Spanish. Why were organisations from procuder countries not considered as stakeholders? I notice that the follow up activities do include ‘elaboration of a protocol for the required dialogue with local/national stakeholders with respect to the reporting on sustainability indicators’. Why should they only be consulted on the reporting, and not on the design (or feasibility) of the indicators?
Distribuir contenido