Codex’s voting rules are not conducive to food safety. The standards are adopted by means of one country one vote with the vast majority comprised of votes from developing countries. Countries are not barred from voting on the passage of standards that would promote their respective economic interests at the expense of public health protection.
Codex’s standard-setting procedures include the Commission’s adoption of certain standards in closed sessions. There is a marked under-representation of consumer and environmental organizations, but industry groups have been closely involved in the Codex standard-setting process for a long time. This imbalance of power is reflected in the composition of member-states’ delegations. Many include industry advisors, but only 3 out of the 165 member states (the United States, Germany, and Norway) include consumer representatives.
Another problem is WTO mandated “scientific” and “risk based” guidelines. These guidelines are based on corporate or corporate sponsored research. Since industry now funds most university research any unfavorable research is likely to be suppressed. Therefore Codex can say genetically modified foods and certain chemical additives are OK and should not be subject to restriction or labeling, while vitamins and food supplements must have strict guidelines limiting dosage.
In the House and Senate there are now WTO/Corporate sponsored bills that will eliminate competition and shift liability from corporate production facilities to local farmers. Corporation lawyers are already drawing up contracts placing all blame for food safety problems squarely on the farmer. There are even seminars being given on “limiting risk and safe guarding stockholder assets in the event of recalls” so everyone in industry uses the same type of contract to shift liability to farmers.
Where is the USA today? The WORLD TRADE REPORT 2005 C sums it up best. The USDA and FDA are busy restructuring “the safest food system in the world” to comply with food standards acceptable to Ag Corporations who wanting to make money exporting food of dubious quality from third world nations and cheap tax supported grain from first world countries.
The overview suggests that the standards development process organized by national, regional and international standards institutions is progressively evolving. The role of international bodies has gained prominence. The national standardization infrastructures of most industrialized countries are now integrated into the network of international standardization. In Europe, for instance, adoption of European standards is mandatory for national member bodies and European standards organizations transpose the international standards into European standards. The World Trade Organization: WORLD TRADE REPORT 2005 C pg 114 thru117
In 2007bush signed an agreement with the EU “...to push ahead with regulatory convergence in nearly 40 areas...” So, Who's really in charge here?
Make your voice heard instead of the World trade organization's
Time is running out to make comments on the Federal Register regarding the WTO's official tracking system for livestock and horses. the deadline is march 11.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
1
1
