Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

SELECT COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND FOOD díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 5 Nov 2003

Vol. 1 No. 3

International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture: Motion.

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food, Deputy Treacy, to the meeting. This is his first appearance before the committee and I hope he will have further opportunities to appear before us. I also welcome the departmental officials.

The select committee has been asked to approve a motion relating to the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, which was laid before the Dáil on 21 October 2003 and was, by order of the Dáil, referred to the select committee in accordance with paragraph 1 of the orders of reference of the committee. The select committee is ordered by the Dáil to send a message to the Dáil not later than 11 November 2003 in the manner prescribed in Standing Order 85. Standing Order 84(2) shall, accordingly, apply. I ask the Minister of State to make his contribution and this will be followed by questions from members.

Is cúis mhór áthais dom theacht anseo le freastal ar an choiste an-tábhachtach seo, Coiste Talmhaíochta agus Bia an Oireachtais. Tá rún an-tábhachtach le bheith againn inniu faoin Chonradh Idirnáisiúnta um Acmhainní Géinteacha Phlanda do Bhia agus Talmhaíochta agus tá mé ag súil go mbeidh tacaíocht an choiste ar fáil ar an rún a chuirfear ansin faoi bhráid na Dála le reachtáil ar son na tíre.

My Department is arranging to have the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture ratified, in tandem with all other member states, at a joint ratification ceremony on a date to be decided but will most likely be in the first four months of 2004. The approval of the select committee is required so that my colleague, the Minister for Agriculture and Food can ratify the treaty during the Irish Presidency of the European Union. It is for this reason the motion is being debated. I will outline background information on plant genetic resources and, hopefully, reply to members' questions.

Following Government approval, the treaty was signed by Ireland, in tandem with all other member states, at a joint signing ceremony in Rome last June. The treaty arises from the bringing together of two distinct international instruments, the international undertaking on plant genetic resources for food and agriculture and the Convention on Biological Diversity involving the governance of plant genetic resources on a worldwide scale.

Plant genetic resources is the term given to the diverse forms of plant life on the planet. The ever increasing demands being made on the earth's natural and cultivated resources to feed and sustain human life have led to a serious depletion of the diversity of all forms of plant life. State authorities and non-governmental organisations began to view this drain with increasing alarm and the first serious efforts to address this on a worldwide scale came in 1983, with the establishment, under the aegis of the Food and Agricultural Organisation, FAO, of a non-legally binding International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, PGRFA. The objective of this undertaking was to ensure that plant genetic resources of agricultural importance and especially those relevant to future food security were collected, preserved and, ultimately, utilised in commercial plant breeding programmes.

During the 1980s and early 1990s biodiversity had become an issue of worldwide concern at the highest level. This led to the holding of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, often referred to as the earth summit. Almost 180 governments, including Ireland, were represented at the summit. One of the major outputs from this conference was the Convention on Biological Diversity. The convention was signed by more than 150 countries including Ireland and the EU and has been ratified at this stage by a similar number of countries.

The objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity are the conservation of biological diversity; the sustainable use of its components; and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of genetic resources. The convention specifically covers biological diversity at the genetic level. Many of the richest areas of biodiversity are found in the least developed countries. The convention recognises that biological diversity should be conserved for reasons of ethics, economic benefit and human survival. Issues such as access to genetic resources, sharing of benefits from the use of genetic resources and access to a transfer of technology, including biotechnology, are included under the convention.

The convention differed to the international undertaking of 1983 in its approach to plant genetic resources by recognising, among other things, that control over such resources is a matter for national sovereignty. The FAO accepted this advance in thinking and ordered that its international understanding should be revised to harmonise with the Convention on Biological Diversity position. The fruit of that harmonisation is the international treaty on which approval to ratify is sought from the committee.

Apart from stipulating that control over genetic resources is a national issue, the treaty also deals with the following specific issues: the obligation to provide access to all genetic resources contained in annexe 1 of the treaty - there will be unlimited access, through a multilateral system to all plant genetic resources in the public domain, for example gene banks and national collections, etc. Access includes associated technology, information and records; fair and equitable benefit sharing between commercial users and those who develop the genetic resources - benefits could include money, information and technology, with the FAO preferring to emphasise the importance of sharing the latter two features over money; farmers' rights - farmers who have played a role in conserving genetic resources, especially in Third World countries, should get recognition for performing a vital function and, thereby, be provided with a tangible benefit in return; supporting components - promotion and effective implementation of the rolling global plan of action for the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture through national actions and International co-operation to provide a coherent framework for capacity building, technology transfer and exchange of information; develop and strengthen the global information system to facilitate the exchange of information based on existing information systems on scientific, technical and environmental matters related to plant genetic resources for food and agriculture; and intellectual property rights - recipients of a plant genetic resource shall not claim any intellectual property or other rights that limit further access to that plant genetic resource or their genetic parts or components in the form received through the multilateral system.

I would also like to outline the position regarding plant genetic resources in Ireland. Plant conservation activities involve various organisations such as Departments, universities, Teagasc and other NGOs. However, the specific management and use of genetic resources in Ireland are in the hands of farmers, breeders' organisations and commercial industry. Co-operation, therefore, among all these players is crucial to the better management and conservation of genetic resources. This should enable the development and use of a wider array of genetic resources in commercial agriculture.

The Department of Agriculture and Food has direct responsibility for facilitating the conservation and utilisation of genetic resources for food and agriculture. In fulfilling its responsibility, the Department co-ordinates the implementation of national activities, which have the following primary policy objectives: the utilisation of genetic resources to increase national food security; the conservation of unique genetic resources, whose survival is endangered; and promoting public awareness of genetic resource management strategies. The Department is aided and advised in this task by an advisory committee on genetic resources for food and agriculture, which comprises stakeholders, experts and officials from a number of relevant Departments.

The Department operates a programme under which grant aid is provided for conservation projects. Since 1996, it has provided almost €600,000 in grants to support the location, research and conservation of Irish-based genetic resources. Almost two thirds of this amount has been directed to plant genetic resources, with the remainder going to animal genetic resources. The plant projects to benefit most under this programme relate to apples, grasses, cereals and beet. I trust this information is of assistance to the committee in its consideration of this important motion and I look forward to members' comments.

I thank the Minister of State and his staff for their attendance. He stated that prior to the international undertaking of 1983 there was a serious depletion in this area due to the industrialisation of agriculture. How many plants were lost? Has the depletion been halted since then? The Minister of State referred to the tangible benefit to farmers in return for playing a role in conserving genetic resources, which is also mentioned in the treaty. What is the tangible benefit? The treaty will put what is there on a concrete footing. What difference, if any, will ratification make?

There is a great deal of uncertainty about genetically modified foods, which is not directly related to the treaty. The committee should call in a few experts to hear their views because this issue will gather momentum as time passes. We are consuming many genetically modified products and we should have more knowledge about them.

I also thank the Minister and his officials for the presentation. As Deputy Timmins said, the Minister referred to farmers being provided with a tangible benefit in return. It is important in terms of farmers' rights that the Minister of State should outline in detail the tangible benefits that are implied, how extensive they are, who places the controls on them, what the limitations are and who makes decisions in this area.

Referring to intellectual property rights the Minister of State stated: "Recipients of a plant genetic resource shall not claim any intellectual property or other rights that limit further access to that plant genetic resource or their genetic parts or components in the form received through the multilateral system". Will owns the IPR? What is that provided for and how extensive is it? How accessible is it?

The Minister of State went on to state: "Plant conservation activities involve various organisations such as Departments, universities, Teagasc and other NGOs. However, the specific management and use of genetic resources in Ireland are in the hands of farmers, breeders' organisations and commercial industry." Would it not be important that NGOs might adopt a more hands on approach because of their significant role in the specific management and use of such resources so that their opinions would be taken on board and they would have a voice on whatever structure is established? While the activities involve various organisations, management of them is limited to farmers, breeders' organisations and commercial industry. I am a slightly concerned at the exclusion of NGOs from that role.

I thank the Minister of State for explaining the motion. Has it been proven beyond doubt that genetically modified food is safe for human consumption? He referred to animal genetic resources. How would the treaty be applied to animals, as they also constitute food? How are they developed?

I welcome the Minister and thank him for his comprehensive presentation which provided an explanation of a complex issue. This international treaty is significant, particularly in regard to the exploitation of Third World resources. The Minister of State said €600,000 has been made available in grants since 1996. Were we in danger of losing the Granny Smith if Ireland did not sign up to the treaty?

What is involved in animal genetic resources? Is the Kerry cow in danger of extinction? What has the Department been able to do through the treaty to protect that strain? It would be a good idea if the committee debated the genetic engineering issue. It is important and we would all like to get our teeth into it.

I will do my best to answer all the questions raised, and if I omit any the committee is free to come back to me on them. Ireland is a small country, and we are talking about a global situation. The impact it is having on us is very small relative to the world as a whole. We have been managing this situation since 1996, taking account of the changes recommended, of the discussions taking place and of what we ultimately expect might happen. My Department has co-ordinated this with State agencies, third level institutes and farming organisations.

This will only have real power and become legally binding immediately after all of the member states lodge their various instruments. The conference of contracting parties makes the decision on how the benefits occur. This is very much a cross-sectoral, international operation in its management and it will operate out of Geneva in a fair and equitable way for all of the various countries.

Farmers own the intellectual property rights. The contracting party is organised, and the benefits are agreed, through the conference and the various measures that will be agreed as we evolve the process with the new regulations. The idea of this treaty is that we should share the resources. As committee members know from their own experiences as public representatives, and from the various dealings we have with planning permission and so on, rare plants and species will be found in different parts of the country, and people cannot understand how they have to be preserved. However, given their rarity and importance, it is critically important that they are preserved and sustained into the future. This overall international treaty is the way in which this will be done. The governing body shall, at its first meeting after the 50 ratifications are lodged, determine the level, form and manner of any payment that is in line with commercial practice. There has to be a sharing of monetary and other benefits of commercialisation.

The contracting parties will agree under the multilateral system to take measures to achieve commercial benefit sharing through the involvement of both the private and public sectors in activities identified under this article, through partnerships and collaboration in research and technological development, including with the private sector in developing countries and countries with economies in transition. In other words, in Third World and poor countries many rare plants that are critically important to the planet and the universe have survived because of a lack of commercialisation and in view of this, these countries must get benefits from the fact that these plants will be sustained and protected into the future. As a result of this treaty, it will be a matter for the contracting parties to agree as to how they will be shared and what proportion will be given to individual countries and farmers.

World population growth has serious implications. In terms of population size, Ireland is at its second highest ever level and, by 2020, will reach the highest level ever. A similar trend is taking place across the world. This creates much pressure on plant life and the environment and also creates much greater demand for food. Thus, it is critically important that the plants which contribute to food generation and production, either in themselves or through the various species of wildlife that impact on the production of food, be sustained into the future.

Forestry crops, greater afforestation and so on have led to a loss of genetic resources, as has the growing level of farming specialisation, such as monoculture. The idea of this treaty is to slow down the impact of these processes. A question was raised about animal genetic resources, etc. In the past few years we have allocated €600,000 to this area. We gave money to the Irish Seed Savers Association for the collection of old Irish apple cultivars.

On the animal side we gave money to Teagasc for the genetic conservation of Galway sheep. Deputy Callanan and myself have a big interest in that. We also gave money to the Connemara Pony Breeders Society for the genetic characterisation and evaluation in the Connemara pony breed. We gave money on the animal side to the Irish Horse Board and to UCD for its involvement in the conservation of the Irish draught horses. We gave money to the agriculture faculty in UCD for the genetic analysis of indigenous collections of agricultural forage grass as a genetic resource of agriculture, known as lolium perenna. Deputy Upton will be much better able to deal with that than I.

I eat it regularly.

We gave money to many other organisations, including the Institute of Bioengineering and Agrocology in Maynooth for the collection and genetic characterisation of semi-wild populations of the same species in the grass seed area. Teagasc got money to examine the genetic diversity between and among eco-types in communities of white clover and perennial wild grass collected in old pastures.

Deputy Ó Fearghaíl raised a question about Granny Smith apples. The whole purpose of this is to ensure sustainability for Granny Smith apples. In this regard, we provided funding to the Irish Seed Savers Association.

In response to Deputy Callanan, this matter has nothing to do with GMOs, indeed, it is concerned with the opposite practices. It is concerned with living organisms and plant life, and the purpose is to sustain plants and the natural environment at its best, as distinct from the GMO process, which modifies plant life for other creations and cultures for the purpose of creating other kinds of food and to secure scientific benefits. We are dealing with nature here as opposed to science.

What would be the tangible benefits for farmers?

Consider our geographic location, climatic conditions, soil conditions, topography and the different plants we produce. There would be sustainability and resilience for those plants and, by maintaining that tradition of growth and annual reproduction, we would give sustainability to our food industry by creating the proper environment for both plant generation and growth and animal sustainability, taking into account our natural climate and animal production. By maintaining both we would be in a much better position to sustain our population and make a huge contribution to our own food requirements and world food requirements. The genetic base is being retained and hopefully put to better scientific use in the future, to the benefit of us all.

On the tangible benefits for farmers, the Minister of State specifically refers in his document to Third World countries and to the fact that they should get recognition for performing a vital function and be provided with some tangible benefit in return. It is very important that a country like Ireland has a voice in deciding or defining what those tangible benefits should be, especially given the absence of the NGOs from the decision making process.

The document specifically refers to the tangible benefits, especially in Third World countries, but I am not clear as to how that will translate down to local level in developing countries and what those benefits might be. How might they be assured to the farming community, which is already at risk in those areas?

Overall, the tangible benefits for farmers will lead to better varieties of plants. That is very important from both a national and global point of view. We all know that there is a serious problem in developing countries vis-à-vis food production and resources to purchase food. Due to lack of commercialisation, these countries have been able to conserve and protect the plants that are rare to their countries. The treaty acknowledges that countries who due to lack of commercialisation have been able to conserve and protect the plants that are rare to them should benefit. The benefits may be in one of three forms: information, database technology or money. The FAO rates money as the least important benefit and it would not be concerned with commercial monetary gain at all times. The governing body at its first meeting will decide and determine the level, form and manner of the payments to be made in line with commercial practice. It will decide the emphasis of the benefits, taking into account the type of plants and their location and the requirements of the country of origin of the plants.

Is it agreed that there should be no further debate by Dáil Éireann on the motion? Agreed. That completes the consideration of the proposal. I thank the Minister of State and his officials for their attendance.

Barr
Roinn