The bill has been criticized by GMO industry stakeholders. They have told us that we do not really need to make regulations since the industry already has a program. In fact, the industry itself looks after approving new crops for export markets. But it is important to understand that the program is voluntary, and that makes all the difference.
Mr. Atamanenko's bill says that the government will now be involved, through regulation. It seeks to make an analysis mandatory under the regulations, not simply to have the companies do the analysis themselves. Those results are not always available, although there are examples to show that an analysis was really done. One example that comes to mind is that of a genetically modified beet that was marketed in 2009. It was ready in 2005. So it took four years before processors and the company were certain that introducing it would not have an effect on their markets.
Under Mr. Atamanenko's bill, however, we would not have to wait for companies to decide whether a product was worth marketing or not. That way, producers would not have to go through what happened with China, when it decided to ban North American canola, rapeseed and soya. The way I see it, this bill is like a safety valve. I would like to hear your thoughts.