Farmers Guardian

Opponents Of GMO 'Could Stifle UK Beet Growers' Efficiency'

The growing competition on world sugar markets and the vexed question of genetically modified organisms were two of the topics discussed at a seminar for sugar beet producers at Newark-on-Trent, Nottinghamshire, organised by the Hilleshog Golden Beet Club.

Opponents of genetically modified organisms could stifle the efficiency of UK and European sugar beet growers in an increasingly competitive world market, the seminar was warned.

Mike Garrod, secretary of the World Association of Beet and Cane Producers, said future competition would come from countries which were fast becoming big players in the world's sugar markets, among them a 'very aggressive' Australia.

"The potential for the use of genetically modified seed for improving our efficiency, reducing costs and cutting chemical inputs is quite enormous, " he told producers.

"We know herbicide resistant beet could be available in two years and the possibilities beyond that are quite incredible"

"But the environmental lobby groups have got at the top of their hit lists GMOs. It does not matter what you say or try to explain to them. GMOs are bad and their going to fight them with all they have got."

Mr. Garrod, whose family has been growing beef since 1912, said that one possibility was to have products made from GMOs labelled, but that would be 'quite impractical' with beef.

"So I think we, the agricultural industry as a whole, have got a big job if we are ever going to get the benefits offered us by GMOs, " he said.

"It only wants one retailer to tell British Sugar 'we do not want sugar that is made from GMO beet' and there is virtually no alternative but for British Sugar to tell us that we cannot use GMO seed.

"In the USA there is no problem. They have over there a food and drug administration which works on scientific principles and not on emotions and I hope that perhaps that the new food safety body that we are having might be similarly constituted. The FDA sees no problem with genetically modified products."

Mr. Garrod suggested that on the GMO problem the farming industry had 'not been too clever'.

"When they first came out we highlighted the economic advantages to growers," he said. "We should have said that this is an advance that will enable us to use less chemicals so you, the consumer, will have less chemicals on the crops we process into sugar, into flour and into everything else."

"We did not. We went the other way and I think we have suffered as a result and we have got a big job[to] put it right."

"Personally, I cannot understand how an organic farmer cannot be in favour of GMOs because it enables him to grow yields without using chemicals, which is what he wants to do, but the organic guys have been absolutely dead against us."

" It is a pity for European and UK beet growers because if we are going to compete with the Australians, is we are going to be nearer the world market we need all the efficiency that we can get."

Mr. Garrod said that the EU sugar regime was secure until 2001. There is really no reason why it should not, but the world trade talks which are just about to get underway are going to have more effect on sugar that GATT. I think it is more than likely that the EU will come under pressure both in regards prices and - or quotas or both.

"But whatever does happen the EU has got to be in the future more concerned with the world situation.

"Australia is one of the countries we have got to worry about."

"Their production at present is about 5 million tonnes; they export about 4 million of that. They are almost certainly likely to go up to 6 million tonnes and they are extremely aggressive."

"The Government has removed all support from sugar, so they are on the world market. Every pound of sugar now sold in Australia is at the world market price."

Mr. Garrod said it was not strictly true that the Australians received no support; they in fact received considerable help on their infrastructure for the building of dams for irrigation because the 'Achilles heel' of Australian cane production was water. "They have either got too much water or not enough."

To give an idea of the efficiency of the Australian industry he highlighted a bulk loading terminal where, because of a problem getting big boats into the quay, a 7.5 km jetty with a continuous belt running its whole length, had been built from the sugar store out to deep water.

"That is the efficiency they have got so they can offer a service to the world sugar consumers," he said.

To give an idea of the efficiency of the Australian industry he highlighted a bulk loading terminal where, because of a problem getting big boats into the quay a 7.5 km jetty with a continuous belt running its whole length, had been built from the sugar store out to deep water.

"That is the efficiency they have got so they can offer a service to the world sugar consumers," he said.

Thailand had also become a big player in the world market and was one of the 'big four' exporters. Labour was cheap, their costs were down, and they were the ones the Australians feared.

There had been a 'terrific change' in Cuba. They country used to produce 8 million tonnes and export 6.5 to 7 million tonnes, but had fallen to below 4 million tonnes. "It is a pretty disastrous situation out there, but the potential is there for it to come back," said Mr. Garrod.

South and Central America were definitely going to be 'big players' in the future. " Colombia, for instance, could harvest cane for 12 months of the year."

China was struggling on self sufficiency, but at a consumption of only 6 kg per head. The average consumption worldwide was 20 kg and in much of Europe it was over 30 kg. "So you have only got to increase the Chinese consumption by 1 kg per head - and hopefully they are beginning to get a taste for sweeter things -- and you increase world demand by one million tonnes."